fit for service - southwest research institute

Southwest Research Institute® San Antonio, Texas

Winter 2013

TECHNOLOGYtoday®

COVER

Technology Today (ISSN 1528-431X) is published three times each year and distributed free of charge. The publication discusses some of the more than 1,000 research and develop-ment projects under way at Southwest Research Institute. The materials in Technology Today may be used for educational and informational purposes by the public and the media. Credit to Southwest Research Institute should be given. This authorization does not extend to property rights such as patents. Commercial and promotional use of the contents in Technology Today without the express written consent of Southwest Research Institute is prohibited. The information published in Technology Today does not necessarily reflect the position or policy of Southwest Research Institute or its clients, and no endorsements should be made or inferred. Address correspondence to the editor, Department of Communications, Southwest Research Institute, P.O. Drawer 28510, San Antonio, Texas 78228-0510, or e-mail [email protected]. To be placed on the mailing list or to make address changes, call (210) 522-2257 or fax (210) 522-3547, or visit update.swri.org.

© 2013 Southwest Research Institute. All rights reserved. Technology Today, Southwest Research Institute and SwRI are registered marks in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

About the InstituteSince its founding in 1947, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) has contributed to the advancement of science and technology by working with clients in industry and government. Per forming research for the benefit of humankind is a long-held tradition. The Institute comprises 11 divisions engaged in contract research spanning a wide range of technologies.

Southwest Research Institute on the Internet: swri.org

Director of CommunicationsCraig Witherow

EditorJoe Fohn

Assistant EditorDeborah Deffenbaugh

Editorial AssistantKasey Chenault

DesignScott Funk

PhotographyLarry Walther

IllustrationsAndrew Blanchard

CirculationGina Monreal

Winter 2013 • Volume 34, No.1

TECHNOLOGYtoday

About the coverPolar dunes on Mars are shown during early spring when covered with carbon dioxide and water frost. Dark sand cascades down the lee slopes as the frost begins to warm and sublimate.

Southwest Research Institute San Antonio, Texas

TECHNOLOGYtoday

Cre

dit:

NA

SA

/JP

L/U

nive

rsity

of A

rizon

a

ARTICLES

DepartmentsTechnics….17Technical Staff Activities….19 Recent Features….29

CONTENTS

6 Measuring the Radiation Environment on Mars

14 Within ARMS Reach

An SwRI-developed technique enhances the capability of portable gamma ray imaging devices.

The Great Kobuk Sand Dunes in Alaska provide an Earth analog for Martian geology.

2 Mars on Earth

10 Fit for Service

SwRI engineers use a variety of techniques to ensure the integrity of pressure vessels and other structures.

An SwRI-led instrument is determining radiation hazards for future manned missions to Mars.

By Cynthia L. Dinwiddie, Ph.D.

On Aug. 5, 2012, at 9:32 p.m. Alaska time, the Mars Science Laboratory on NASA’s Curiosity rover descended to the Martian surface in a place called Gale Crater. Between the rover and a mountainous

peak in the center of the impact crater lies a field of dark sand dunes. Planetary scientists have recently discovered that sand dunes on Mars are actively moving by using a satellite remote-sensing method that was first developed at Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) by Dr. Marius Necsoiu to estimate the speed at which the Great Kobuk Sand Dunes are moving in Kobuk Valley National Park, Alaska. Because good repeat photographic images of the Martian surface are relatively few, scientists are just beginning to have enough data to compare images of a single planetary scene at multiple times. Some people talk about Mars as if it were a dead planet, but if one looks closely at the planet long enough, it becomes apparent it is alive with many physical processes. In the recent past, planetary scientists thought sand dunes on Mars were frozen in space and time, but since 2008 they’ve known that it isn’t true. Geologically speaking, Mars is very much alive.

To help prepare humankind for exploration of other worlds and expand understanding of extraterrestrial geologic pro-cesses, planetary scientists study the extreme landscapes of Earth that are most similar to other planets or their moons. In the scientific discipline of comparative planetology, the features and processes that are observed on extraterrestrial planetary bodies in our solar system are compared to similar features and processes on Earth because our own landscapes are more easily accessible for detailed study and analysis — we call these places “planetary analogs” because they are reasonably comparable to planetary landscapes. This is why a team of SwRI research-ers began conducting satellite remote-sensing investigations of the Great Kobuk Sand Dunes in 2008, and then traveled to this planetary analog site to perform geophysical, meteorological and geomorphological field research in 2010.

Sand dunes in Kobuk Valley National Park are excruciatingly slow-moving, just

like dunes on Mars. Sand dunes near Earth’s equator don’t move slowly like this, and the smaller the dune, the faster it moves. Strangely, however,

Mars On EarthThe Great Kobuk Sand Dunes in Alaska provide an Earth analog for Martian geology

Dr. Cynthia L. Dinwiddie is a principal engineer in the Earth, Material and Planetary Sciences Department of the Geosciences and Engineering Division. She is a hydrogeologist who develops integrated geophysical and remote-sensing characterization methodologies to investigate hydrologic processes on Earth and Mars.

2 Technology Today • Winter 2013

© P

hoto

co

urte

sy S

eth

Kan

tner

D01

8864

Technology Today • Winter 2013 3

remote-sensing data analyses suggest that the largest dunes in Kobuk Valley may actually move faster than the small-est ones. Why do Arctic dunes behave

differently than warm-climate dunes, and do any Martian dunes behave like Earth’s Arctic dunes? To better understand why cold dunes move so slowly, the SwRI team used tools including shallow boreholes, ground temperature sensors and ground-penetrating radar and capacitively coupled resistivity surveys to peer inside the sand dunes in Kobuk Valley in late March 2010, when the weather was cold. During March in Alaska, “cold” means an average daily temperature of 6 degrees Fahren-heit. This is cold enough that the season-ally frozen active layer was at its maximum annual thickness, and it was assumed that the dunes likely would be frozen to their base. The annual average temperature in

Kobuk Valley is 25 degrees Fahren-heit, which is cold enough for the dunes to be surrounded by wide-spread, discontinuous permafrost.

At the Great Kobuk Sand Dunes, lowland areas between dunes (called interdunes), small dunes, downwind lee slopes of large dunes, and most of the upwind stoss slopes of large dunes are snow-covered for approxi-mately two-thirds of the year, and only the elevated crests of the largest dunes remain exposed to wind throughout much of the win-ter season. It is thought that this seasonal disconnect between the dune sand and winds may be why the large dunes in Kobuk Valley move faster than the small ones. Polar dunes on Mars experience a

similar disconnection during Martian win-ter, when they are covered with carbon dioxide and water frost.

Electrical resistivity surveys of the sand dunes showed that the seasonally frozen active layer was approximately 13 feet thick beneath dune crests, and less than 7 feet thick beneath interdunes. The dunes are composed of fine sand, through which liquid water should per-meate and drain rapidly. However, the team found groundwater in boreholes below the frozen interdunes, and no permafrost. So, despite an average annual temperature that is 7 degrees colder than water’s freezing point, liquid water persists year-round beneath the dunes.

Mars On Earth

A series of 2.4-kilometer-long radargrams show regional groundwater at about 70 meter elevation above mean sea level and a layer of perched liquid water high in the dune uplands. These data were collected by 100 MHz ground-penetrating radar antennas towed on a sled by a snowmobile (photo at left).

A photographic image of the surface of Gale Crater, Mars, taken by the Curiosity rover reveals a field of dark sand in the foreground, with the foothills of Mt. Sharp in the distance.

Cre

dit:

NA

SA

/JP

L-C

alte

ch/M

SS

S

D018872

D01

8865

D01

8866

Technology Today • Winter 20134

Water where ice should be

Geophysical data suggest that the regional groundwater beneath the dunes is relatively flat-lying, like a table top, and approaches the surface within the inter-dunes; however, the data also strongly suggest that there is a thin layer of liquid water just below the frozen active layer, which mirrors dune elevation and relief (i.e., topography). This liquid water perched high in the dune system was curious and unexpected, leading the SwRI research team to look into possible explanations. The pres-ence and topographic mirroring behavior of the near-surface liquid water layer suggests that it is perched on a thermally controlled, low-permeability barrier to downward water

flow. This barrier would have had to have developed in dynamic equilibrium with slow dune migration, and eroding rem-nants of it may be visible on upwind stoss slopes when not covered by snow.

The data suggest that this low-perme-ability barrier develops throughout the Great Kobuk Sand Dunes by freeze- drying, which can produce both ice lenses and calcium-carbonate cements, called calcrete, at the base of the active layer, where downward freezing from the land surface occurs. A cryogenic barrier could be composed of an ice-rich layer that lies perpendicular to the direction of heat flow at the base of the active layer. It also may be composed of cryogenic cement or other clay-sized particles pref-erentially deposited through cryogenic

Resistivity data from three sites on the Great Kobuk Sand Dunes indicate transitions between the frozen active layer (hot colors) and the regional groundwater aquifer (cool colors). Intermediate colors beneath the elevated dune at the third site probably indicate a thick ice- and water-free vadose zone between the active layer and the regional water table aquifer.

Polar dunes on Mars are shown during early spring when covered with carbon dioxide and water frost. Dark sand cascades down the lee slopes as the frost begins to warm and sublimate.

Cre

dit:

NA

SA

/JP

L/U

nive

rsity

of A

rizon

a

processes during annual freeze-up. Supporting the calcrete hypotheses, carbonate grains comprise 7 percent of the dune sand, and widespread calcrete has been observed by others when snow cover is absent.

The SwRI team believes these cold-climate sand dunes move slowly because seasonal snow cover acts like a windshield above the sand, and seasonally frozen water in the active layer immobilizes most of the sand during the winter. Warm-season rains also play a role in minimizing the sand that is available to be lofted by wind. Finally, the regional aquifer beneath the inter-dunes and the perched

D018865

D018879

D018880


water high in the dune uplands both make the sand sticky, like wet beach sand that can be molded when one builds a sand castle. The Great Kobuk Sand Dunes are a “wet” sand dune system. Although they are influenced by a semi-arid cli-mate, there is a lot of near-surface water trapped above the near-continuous permafrost in this region. These dunes provide an excellent planetary analog site for studying how the water cycle influ-ences sand transport under conditions similar to those of Martian polar deserts, especially ancient Mars, which was a bit warmer and wetter, and subject to higher atmospheric pressure, than the planet is today.

Gully erosion parallels

While conducting this planetary analog study at the Great Kobuk Sand Dunes, SwRI scientist Dr. Don Hooper noticed that several melt-water debris flows were forming on some west-facing slopes of the dunes. Debris flows with gully or ero-sion tracks also appear on the slopes of several dune fields on Mars. This new observation was important because it indicated that yet another planetary analog process was

occurring at the dunes, and only a few minutes of above-freezing temperatures are needed to melt water and mobilize sand transport down steep slopes. Small debris flows originate near dune crests, become channelized down lee slopes, and terminate with a fan-shaped deposit. New surveys will be needed to measure debris flow rates and gully morphologies, slope angle, solar radiation, subsurface temperature and moisture profiles and other variables to validate a conceptual

AcknowledgmentsThis work was supported by NASA

Mars Fundamental Research Program grant NNX08AN65G and by Southwest Research Institute’s internal research and development program. Colleagues who have contributed to these studies include Dr. Marius Necsoiu, Dr. David E. Stillman, Ronald N. McGinnis, Dr. Donald M. Hooper, Dr. Gary R. Walter, Dr. Stuart A. Stothoff and Dr. Robert E. Grimm, all of SwRI; and also Timothy I. Michaels, Kevin J. Bjella and Sébastien Leprince.

The author also thanks Seth Kantner for his invaluable field knowledge and sup-port, Clarence Wood for use of his private allotment, Jim Kincaid and Alvin Williams for their logistical support, and the National Park Service (NPS) for research permit KOVA-2010-SCI-0001.

Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessar-ily reflect the official positions or views of the National Aeronautics and Space Administra-tion or of the U.S. National Park Service.

Meltwater debris flow appears on the lee slope of a sand dune at Great Kobuk.

A weather station is in the distance.

model of the processes that control debris flow formation on the Great Kobuk Sand Dunes.

Conclusion

Liquid water, solid ice and water vapor can coexist in stable equilibrium at what is called the “triple point of water.” Recent measurements of air temperature and pressure in Gale Crater on Mars sug-gest that liquid water potentially would be stable there during the warmest portion of each day under current environmental conditions. Late-winter to early-spring conditions and processes at the Great Kobuk Sand Dunes are sufficiently similar that they can serve as an informative ana-log to near-equatorial processes in Gale Crater, Mars. Consequently, information from SwRI’s studies at the Great Kobuk Sand Dunes can be directly applied to mission results from Curiosity. Effective use of this Earth analog can give impor-tant clues to the search for water on Mars. Questions about this article? Contact Dinwiddie at (210) 522-6085 or [email protected].

Snow-covered sand dunes in the Kobuk Valley National Park, Alaska, provide planetary geolo-gists with a planetary analog for similar structures observed on the surface of Mars. A surprising observation at the Great Kobuk Sand Dunes was the discovery of liquid water emerging from the dunes, despite subfreezing temperatures that correspond to some measured on Mars.

D018868

D018867


After the newest Mars rover, Curiosity, landed safely on the Red Planet’s surface on Aug. 6, 2012, scientists began a new round of exploration using the car-size vehicle’s 10 onboard science instruments.

One instrument, however, had already been gathering valuable data during the nine-month journey from Earth to Mars. The Southwest Research Institute (SwRI)-led Radiation Assessment Detector (RAD) was powered up and began col-lecting data 10 days after the spacecraft was launched from Cape Canaveral on Nov. 26, 2011. Since then, RAD has col-lected roughly seven months of data during the cruise and now more than five months of data on the Martian surface. These are the first measurements of their kind taken on any other planet’s surface besides Earth.

RAD is a compact but powerful energetic particle ana-lyzer designed to characterize the radiation environment on the surface of Mars and quantify the radiation hazard that astronauts might encounter on future human missions to the Red Planet. RAD’s measurements will help NASA plan future manned missions as well as help validate the radiation transport models that are being used to evaluate spacecraft and spacesuit shielding designs. The radiation environment on Mars is a complex combination of galactic cosmic rays, solar energetic particles, secondary neutrons and other particles created both in the atmosphere and at the Martian surface. One of the unique aspects of RAD is that it is capable of simultaneously measuring and identifying these different

particle types, over a wide energy range, using a small (approxi-mately three pounds) package.

Dual purpose: astronaut safety and Mars habitability

The primary, overarching scientific objective of the Mars Science Laboratory is to “assess the past and present habitability of Mars,” and to search for the elements needed to support life, such as water and carbon-based materials. RAD plays an essential role in achieving MSL’s prime science objective by helping to characterize and understand “life-limiting” factors, or factors det-rimental to habitability, through its measurements of energetic particle fluxes at the surface of Mars. At the same time, RAD’s characterization of the Martian radiation environment is a critical contribution to NASA’s efforts to plan for possible future manned expeditions. By addressing both science and human explora-tion objectives, RAD has effectively become a “poster child” for cooperation and science exchange between NASA’s Science and Human Exploration Directorates.

In addition to identifying radiation hazards for future human exploration, characterizing the radiation environment on the surface of Mars will also aid understanding the degree to which the radiation environment might put constraints on the existence of microbial life (past or present), or the preservation of signs of such life, since radiation also contributes to the breakdown of near-surface organic compounds. For example, how deep below the regolith, or Martian surface, must microbial life be (or have

An SwRI-led instrument is determining radia-tion hazards for future manned missions to Mars

Measuring the Radiation Environment on Mars

The car-size Mars Science Laboratory spacecraft has been exploring the surface of the Red Planet since August 2012 to assess past and present habitability of Mars. Positioned near the center of the rover, the SwRI-led Radiation Assessment Detector is about the size of a coffee can and is characterizing the planet’s radiation environment, a key influence on life.

Image courtesy of NASA/JPL

By Donald M. Hassler, Ph.D.


been) to survive the mutagenic influences of the observed radia-tion levels? Although current-day radiation levels probably make the surface of modern Mars inhospitable for microbial life as we know it, RAD’s measurements will help determine the depth below the surface that a possible future robot on a life-detection mission might need to dig or drill to reach a “microbial safe zone.”

For the purposes of human exploration, planning for a future

manned mission to Mars requires understanding the possible radiation hazards over the course of the entire round-trip mission. In general, a manned mission to Mars can be separated into three phases: the cruise phase to Mars (six to nine months), the time on the Martian surface (more than six months), and the return trip to Earth (six to nine months). Therefore, estimating the total radia-tion dose that an astronaut will receive on a future Mars mission requires assessing the contributions from all three phases. Consequently, an impor-tant secondary objective of RAD is to characterize the radiation environment from inside the MSL spacecraft during its journey through interplan-etary space on its way to Mars. Interestingly, the level of shielding provided by the MSL spacecraft is not unlike that of the International Space Station (ISS) or the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) that will be used to take future astronauts into deep space. Thus, during the cruise phase to Mars, radiation levels measured by RAD served as a proxy for the radiation levels that astronauts might experience on a journey to Mars.

The first data packets received from RAD revealed a strong flux in space, even inside the spacecraft, with radiation doses about four times higher than the baseline levels measured on the launch pad from the spacecraft’s own nuclear-powered generator. RAD was measuring the relevant energetic particle species originating from galactic cosmic rays, the Sun and other sources. Of particu-lar interest were particles accelerated by flares and coronal mass ejections (CMEs) originating from the surface of the Sun, which spew fast-moving clouds of radiation across the solar system. Besides being scientifically interesting in terms of their physics,

particles from these giant clouds could pose a potentially greater biological hazard as they hit the spacecraft and release an inward cascade of second-ary particles inside the capsule. Just as an astronaut would be, RAD was tucked inside the spacecraft for the journey and thus could characterize these secondary particle showers, as well as higher-energy galactic cosmic rays and the secondary particles that they produced inside the spacecraft as well. Thus, measurements taken by RAD are providing insight into the shielding required for spacecraft to be used in future manned missions to deep space.

Weathering a solar storm

The decision to power RAD on during the journey to Mars was vali-dated when the spacecraft was exposed to the largest solar particle event since 2003. The flood of energetic particles unleashed by a solar flare and a fast-moving CME swept over not only the spacecraft, but also Earth and Mars. Although solar storms create the Earth’s aurorae and can affect Earth satellites, air travel and GPS systems, this one did no damage to the Mars Science Laboratory. However, its effects could be seen clearly in data downloaded from RAD.

The event was particu-larly exciting because of the alignment of Earth, the MSL and Mars at the time, and also because of the opportunity it afforded to compare data from RAD with data from other spacecraft that also observed the storm. The solar particle event was observed by the Solar Dynamics Obser-vatory (SDO), Geostationary Operational Environment Sat-ellites (GOES), the Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE) and the twin Solar Terrestrial

Dr. Donald M. Hassler is a senior program director in the Planetary Science Directorate at Boulder, Colo., part of SwRI’s Space Science and Engineering Division. He has more than 25 years of experience in space physics and the development, characterization and calibration of space instrumentation, and he is principal investigator of the Radiation Assessment Detector.

The Radiation Assessment Detector, one of 10 instruments onboard the Mars Science Laboratory, measures fluxes of solar energetic particles and galactic cosmic rays to help assess the radiation environment on Mars, as well as on the journey from Earth to Mars.

Image courtesy of NASA/JPL

D017210_1100

D018873

D018869


Relations Observatory (STEREO) spacecraft in Earth orbit, as well as by the Solar Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) flying at the Lagrangian Point L1 between Earth and the Sun.

During the seven months of cruise obser-vations, as the Sun’s activity was increasing, RAD observed several large X-class and M-class solar flares. Data from RAD, taken from inside the MSL, are now being compared with data from the other satellites to better understand and predict the dose rate that future astronauts will experience.

First measurements from the surface of another planet

Curiosity landed on Mars with a flawless, “picture-perfect” landing, on Aug. 6, 2012. The next day, or “sol” (the term for a Martian day), RAD, which had been switched off during the final approach to Mars, was turned back on (the first scientific instrument to be turned on after landing, other than the cameras). Serendipitously, the day RAD made its first measure-ments of cosmic rays on the surface of Mars, Aug. 7, 2012, was the 100th year anniversary of the discovery of cosmic rays on Earth by Victor Hess (Aug. 7, 1912), using measurements from a balloon flight in Austria. Since Aug. 7, the team has collected more than 150 sols (five Earth months) of data, and continues to operate RAD

around the clock. As Curiosity begins its traverse of the Red Planet, sampling the soil and sniffing the air, RAD quietly collects data in the background, accumulating statistics and keeping a watchful eye for any signs of the type of flares or solar storms seen during cruise. So far, the space weather on Mars has been quiet. But as the 11-year solar maximum approaches, many more large solar particle events or solar storms are expected over the course of the mission. And given that the rover and all 10 instruments are working perfectly, it is hoped that the mission will be long-lived, perhaps lasting until the next solar maximum — the period when the Sun is most active — 10 to 12 years from now.

Operating on “Mars time”

Although the operation of RAD on Mars is relatively simple, the operation of the rover, with all 10 scientific instruments, is quite com-plex. Not only does the science operations team need to coordinate the daily observing programs of each of the 10 instruments, the team also needs to assess the results of the previous sol’s activities and plan the activities for the next sol, including coordinating the daily drives or traverses, selecting, handling and processing soil samples, as well as the daily commanding and telemetry schedules. Complicating these daily activities is the fact that a “sol” is 39 minutes longer than an Earth

The RAD instrument measures charged and neutral particles as they pass through a series of charged-particle detectors (blue surfaces), a gamma ray detector (red) and

a neutron detector (brown). Anti-coincidence shielding surrounds the gamma-ray and neutron sections of the

instrument. The red arrow points to the instrument’s location on the Mars Science Laboratory.

D018870

D018874

Courtesy NASA/JPL-CalTech


day. So, for the past four months the entire science operations team has been operating on “Mars time,” meaning that the start of each workday begins about 39 minutes later than the previous one, making it difficult to establish a daily routine. An operations day that begins at 8 a.m. one day would start at 8 p.m. two weeks later. Because the operations team includes engineers, operations specialists and scientists to perform all of the tasks associated with operating the rover and sci-ence instruments, as well as assessing the science and engineering results from each previous day’s activities, more than 200 people have been adjusting to Mars time. One of the more interesting aspects of operating on Mars time was to deliver a science lecture with 200 MSL scientists in the audience, at 3 a.m. Earth time.

Radiation environment sensitive to Mars weather and climate

One of the first exciting results from RAD is that the radiation environment on Mars is very sensitive to daily changes in weather, primarily atmospheric pressure. The Martian atmosphere provides some level of shielding from the harsh galactic cosmic rays coming from space, and the RAD team is finding that the thickness of the atmosphere as a function of daily heating and cooling varies by about 10 percent, which causes a few percent-age points variation in the radiation dose observed at the surface. As longer time series of data are accumulated, seasonal variations may appear as well.

Not only are there diurnal variations caused by ther-mal tides in the atmosphere, but also the team is observ-ing longer-term variations associated with changes in the magnetic structure in the heliosphere or interplanetary space surrounding Mars. This heliospheric structure is magnetically tied to the Sun, and it rotates with the Sun with a 27- to 28-day period. Although many new discov-eries are being made about the Mars environment with RAD, the team is still waiting for solar activity to pick up and the first large solar storm to be observed from the Martian surface.

The RAD instrument’s makeup

Positioned near the left-front corner of the rover, the three-pound RAD is only about the size of a coffee can, but performs the same functions as Earth-bound devices 10 times its size. RAD consists of a charged particle tele-scope comprising three solid-state silicon detectors and a cesium iodide (CsI) calorimeter. An additional plastic scintillator is used together with the CsI calorimeter, surrounded by an anti-coincidence shield, to detect and characterize neutral particles, such as neutrons and gamma rays. The outputs of the various solid-state detectors, and photodiodes used with the CsI and plastic scintillators, are converted to digital signals for further

processing. The digital logic includes an embedded microcontroller to bin and format the data.

The RAD instrument is mounted just below the top deck of the rover, with the charged particle telescope pointed in the zenith direc-tion. In this way, RAD detects charged particles arriving from space as well as neutrons and gamma rays coming from Mars’ atmosphere above, as well as from the surface below.

Conclusion

RAD continues to operate flawlessly on the surface of Mars, and is expected to do so throughout the nominal two-year mission, as well as for any extended mission, which it is hoped will last 10 years or more, providing an unprecedented, entire solar cycle of radiation data from the surface of another planet. The importance of characterizing the radiation environment wherever humans go in space with an instru-ment such as RAD has been recognized by NASA’s Human Exploration and Operations Directorate. SwRI scientists are building a next-gener-ation RAD for Johnson Space Center to go on the International Space Station in 2014.

Questions about this article? Contact Hassler at (303) 546-9670 or [email protected].

The MSL spacecraft provided some shielding from solar events during cruise, reducing significantly the particle flux observed

by RAD during these events. The particle flux observed by RAD inside the MSL spacecraft is shown in the figure to be several

orders of magnitude less than that observed by the unshielded SIS instrument on the ACE spacecraft.

AcknowledgmentsThe RAD project is a team effort, with many individuals and organizations

providing significant contributions. SwRI, together with Christian Albrechts University in Kiel, Germany, built RAD. The dedicated efforts of the many scientists, engineers, technicians and support staff, at both SwRI and CAU, are gratefully acknowledged. In particular, the efforts of Dr. Cary Zeitlin, John Andrews, Dr. Bent Ehresmann, Kerry Neal, Joe Peterson, Dr. Scot Rafkin, Kelly Smith, Yvette Tyler and Eddie Weigle at SwRI, Robert Wimmer-Schweingruber, Eckart Boehm, Stephan Boettcher, Soenke Burmeister, Jan Kohler, Jingnan Guo, Cesar Martin and Lars Seimetz at CAU, Guenther Reitz at Germany’s national aerospace research center, Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt, Dave Brinza at Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Arik Posner at NASA HQ and Frank Cucinotta at Johnson Space Center, have been fundamental to RAD’s success. RAD is supported by funding from the NASA Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate and DLR. Early development for RAD was supported by SwRI’s internal research and development program.

D01

8875


What is “fitness-for-service” analysis?

For more than 35 years, Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) engineers have performed structural integrity assessments on pressure vessels, aircraft and propulsion systems, offshore structures, and other structures in accordance with sound engineering prin-ciples and relevant industry practices. Recently, as cus-tomer demand for pressure vessels has increased, SwRI re-established a program for fabrication of pressure vessels in accordance with Section VIII, Divisions 1, 2 and 3 of the ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. ASME rules enable SwRI engineers to perform detailed structural integrity assessments, or fitness-for-service (FFS) analy-ses, of pressure vessels in accordance with both API (American Petroleum Institute) and ASME standards.

The structural integrity of a pressure vessel is gen-erally assessed by comparing the calculated stress with the strength of the material and then considering other potential failure mechanisms like fatigue. This type of assessment usually assumes that the vessel is free of defects such as cracks, voids, weld slag or inclusions.

By Joseph Crouch and Curtis Sifford

Pressure vessels are common pieces of equipment used worldwide for many applica-tions, such as compressed air

cylinders, hyperbaric test chambers, chemical reaction vessels, medical decompression chambers and sub-marine pressure hulls. They are designed to hold gases or liquids at pressures that are frequently much greater than atmospheric pressure, or in the case of a submarine pres-sure hull, to withstand the crushing external pressure of the deep ocean.

Compressed air cylinders provide a constant air supply for power-ing pneumatic tooling. Hyperbaric test and chemical reaction chambers create pressurized environments that simulate deep ocean pressures or geologic formation pressures, or create an environment to allow chemical reactions to occur. Decompression chambers are used for safe decompression for saturation divers who perform work in deep water, or for medical purposes to promote healing.

As with most structures, pressure vessels are designed for a finite useful life based on such parameters as the number of pressurization cycles expected, the magnitude of each pressure cycle and structural changes, such as a reduction in material thickness caused by corrosion. These “design” parameters are usually estimates and are often greater than the actual values experienced during operation. If the values used to predict the design life of the vessel are more excessive than what is actually experienced, the vessel will still possess usable life upon reach-ing the end of its design life.

Unless the structural integrity of a vessel can be re-assessed to deter-mine that it can still be used safely for a longer period of time, a vessel that has reached the end of its design life should be taken out of service. Replacements can be costly, and the loss of a vessel interrupts productiv-ity. Thus, establishing any remaining usable life is very important.

SwRI engineers use a variety of techniques to ensure the integrity of pressure vessels and other structures

Fit for Service

SwRI researchers routinely perform fit for service analyses on a variety of structures such as the hull of the next-generation Alvin manned submersible shown here.

D01

8123

_017

5


However, defects that may have occurred during fabrication, or that develop during its service life also are often present. A fracture mechan-ics assessment is therefore required to determine if these defects will have a negative effect on the future operation of the vessel.

A pressure vessel containing a defect is considered fit-for-service if it is able to withstand the loads (such as pressure, thermal, wind and earthquake) experienced during its desired service life with a suit-able safety margin to account for any uncertainty in the assumptions used for the assessment. Key ele-ments for an FFS assessment are the loads applied to the component, the dimensions and shape of any defects, the material’s mechanical properties (such as fracture toughness), and the rate of crack growth for the material.

Typically, a fracture mechanics fitness-for-service assessment is performed after a defect or crack has been found following routine inspection, maintenance or safety checks, or when the effect of an undetectable crack needs to be considered. The assessment determines whether the pressure vessel is safe to operate with the defect or to establish inspection intervals for monitoring the defect. If the defect size is unacceptable, then the user must decide whether to repair it, replace the equip-ment or re-rate the equipment for a safe, lower operating load. A fracture mechanics assessment may also be used as input to a quality control program to determine critical locations for future inspection, the size of a defect that must be detected with a high confidence and the necessary inspection interval.

SwRI engineers use the guide-lines presented in Fitness-for-Service, API 579-1/ASME FFS-1, which is “a compendium of consensus meth-ods for reliable assessment of the structural integrity of equipment containing identified flaws,” first issued as a recommended practice document in January 2000. These methods require that the state of the vessel be determined using nondestructive evaluation (NDE) methodologies. This can be done specifically for an FFS effort as part of a safety program, or the FFS assessment can result from the identification of flaws found dur-ing routine inspection.

The FFS process begins with an NDE evaluation of the structure. This provides details such as depth, length and loca-tion of any defects or cracks that have been detected. Based on the probability of detection, assumptions must be made about other defects that might exist but may not have been detected. Once the defect state of the vessel has been characterized,

linear elastic fracture mechanics analysis is used to calculate the stress intensity factor, K, a measure of the “driving force” available in the structure that can cause a crack

to propagate unstably. SwRI has a great deal of expertise in NDE methodologies, probabilistic assessment and uncertainty charac-terization, as well as fracture mechanics and finite element analy-ses, all of which are important to an FFS assessment.

SwRI engineers use finite element analysis to determine the stresses in the structure that result from the applied loads. When a structure is loaded to a level that is less than the yield strength of its material, it behaves elastically, meaning it returns to its original shape like a spring, when the load is removed. If the structure is loaded to a stress level that is greater than its mate-rial yield strength, it may experience a change in shape resulting

from permanent plastic deforma-tion, the extent of which could be local (barely noticeable) or global (large deformations) approaching plastic collapse, depending on the magnitude of the applied loads. In the presence of plasticity, the driving force that would continue to propa-gate a crack may be underestimated using linear elastic fracture mechan-ics. Thus, to account for the inter-action between failure by fracture (crack instability) and failure by plas-tic collapse under limit load, SwRI uses the failure assessment diagram (FAD) approach. The FAD is a two-parameter graphical representation of the failure envelope of a cracked structure expressed in terms of the

ratio of the applied stress intensity factor to the material fracture toughness (the toughness ratio, Kr = Kapp/Kmat) and the ratio of the applied load to the plastic limit load of the structure (the load ratio, Lr = P/PL).

To use the FAD approach, assessment points with coordi-nates (Lr , Kr) calculated based on the applicable loads, crack type and crack size(s), and material properties are compared with

Joseph Crouch (left) is manager of the Marine Structures and Engineer-ing Section in SwRI’s Mechanical Engineering Division. Crouch has extensive experience in the design, fabrication and testing of structures for the oil and gas, offshore, marine, space and aerospace industries. Curtis Sifford is a senior research engineer in the Marine Structures and Engineering Section. He special-izes in the design and analysis of pressure-containing structures.

A failure assessment diagram approach is one method SwRI researchers use to determine if a structure is fit for service.

D018746_9104

D018884


the failure envelope line. Assessment points that lie inside the envelope indicate non-failure, while assessment points outside the envelope indicate failure. For many fatigue crack growth analyses, the assessment points will initially be far inside the failure assessment line envelope and will gradually grow toward the envelope as the crack grows sub-critically. When the load ratio is low, the FAD predicts failure based on fracture instability; however, as the load ratio increases, the interaction of the presence of plasticity decreases the allow-able stress intensity factor. If the assessment point is on, or inside, the FAD envelope, which indicates that there is remain-ing service life, then the pressure vessel is deemed safe, and therefore fit for service. A fatigue crack growth analysis must then be performed to determine how long the pressure vessel will remain fit for service.

FFS examples

Recently, SwRI engineers have performed FFS assessments on an in-service section of a gas pipeline, a submarine hull and a decompression chamber for a large tunnel boring machine. During inspection, the gas pipeline was found to have a defect and required FFS assessment to determine if the defect had to be addressed immediately or if it was still usable for a specified period of time. Because the submarine was newly built, researchers had to assume that a defect existed, but was too small to be detectable. The FFS assessment on the submarine was performed to determine if the possible defect would jeopardize the safety of the occupants between scheduled inspection intervals.

The tunnel boring machine was an earth pressure-balanced type, which provides continuous support to the tunnel face by balancing the earth and water pressure against the thrust pressure of the machine. Under normal operating conditions, workers operate the machine in an enclosed environment behind the cutting head, which is maintained at atmospheric pressure. How-ever, if cutting head maintenance is required, workers must travel through the decompression cham-ber, which exposes them to elevated pressures. Once they complete their activity under pressure, they then have to re-enter the decompres-sion chamber and stay inside while the pressure is slowly brought back down to ambient conditions, much as a diver must decom-press in a chamber after spending time deep below the sur-face. This decompression prevents the maintenance personnel from getting sick from “the bends,” which is caused by gas bubbles forming in their blood.

The problem arose when the tunnel boring machine was required to dig deeper into soil conditions that demanded a

higher internal pressure rating. The decompression chamber was re-analyzed for the higher pressure and then subjected to a hydrostatic pressure test in accordance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code to prove the structural integrity of the system. The ASME code also requires an inspection of the welded joints following the pressure test. During this inspection, multiple defects were found in some welds. SwRI engineers were therefore asked to perform an FFS assessment to deter-mine if the weld defects had to be repaired or if the decompres-sion chamber was fit-for-service with the defects in place.

For the decompression chamber, the principal loading was a result of internal pressure. Residual thermal stresses from welding were also considered. Engineers determined a residual stress distribution using a solution from FFS that provided a con-servative upper bound for the residual weld stresses based on numerical analysis and a literature survey of published results.

How residual stresses affect the stress intensity factor depends on the level of material plasticity. For elastic conditions, the residual stress can significantly weaken a structure contain-ing cracks. On the other hand, when there is high plasticity, the effect of these stresses can be small. The API/ASME FFS method-ology applies a plasticity interaction factor to the stress intensity

factor to account for this effect. The crack dimensions and shape

were determined using phased array ultrasonic inspection. With this type of NDE inspection, multiple ultra-sonic elements are used and their timing is varied so it is possible to steer, focus and scan the beam, pro-viding a visual image of the defect or crack. Nearly all of the defects found on the decompression chamber were embedded and classified as weld slag or porosity. Although classified as “inclusions,” the defects were consid-ered to be cracks for the FFS assess-ment. Researchers also determined the defect depth, length and distance from the surface.

The crack-growth rate and frac-ture toughness are well documented for SA516 Grade 70 steel, the base metal used in the chamber. However, this was not the case for the weld metal. There were additional con-cerns regarding the welds’ toughness since they were not stress-relieved. For these reasons, SwRI researchers performed fracture toughness testing on the welded plate. They tested the fracture toughness in the weld metal,

at the fusion line and in the heat-affected zone. Results were used to establish a fracture toughness value that could be

used for the FFS assessment. Stress intensity factors for the weld defects that were

assumed to be cracks were calculated using the SwRI-developed computer code NASGRO®. NASGRO, which earned an R&D 100 Award in 2003, was initially developed and released in the 1980s for fracture control analysis of NASA space hardware and has been continuously improved since 2000 by the NASGRO

Senior Research Engineer Curtis Sifford went onsite and examined the decompression chamber of the tunnel boring machine.

D018887


Consortium under the management of SwRI. It contains a large library of advanced stress intensity factor solutions and material property data combined with extensive analysis capabilities.

SwRI engineers calculated a toughness ratio by dividing the stress intensity factor by the fracture toughness of the material. Given the load and toughness ratios, the assess-ment points were plotted on the failure assessment diagram to determine if the weld defects were acceptable. Because all of the assessment points were inside the failure assessment diagram envelope, engineers determined that the decom-pression chamber was fit-for-service for the expected static loads, with the weld defects found during inspection.

It is also possible for a crack to grow under cyclic loading. For this reason, a crack-growth analysis was also required. NASGRO was again used. While the tun-nel boring machine is in use, the decompression chamber is kept sealed and is only used for mainte-nance of the cutting head. Therefore, it was expected that relatively few pressur-ization cycles would occur, so no significant crack growth was expected. The fatigue crack-growth analysis demonstrated that the pres-sure load could be cycled to the maximum operating pressure more than 9,000 times before the first assess-ment point on the failure assessment diagram reached the envelope. This remaining life greatly exceeded the service life of the decompression chamber for the tunneling project. Thus, the remaining life was sufficient and engineers deter-mined the decompression chamber was fit-for-service for the remainder of the project, saving the client considerable cost and time.

Requisite tools and experience As illustrated by the decompression chamber project, API-

579-1/ASME FFS-1 FFS provides a preferred means for assessing equipment that no longer meets its original design specification or code of construction. Other assessment techniques are avail-able for dealing with a variety of flaws or damage mechanisms, such as metal loss, pitting, corrosion, lamination, dents, gouges, weld misalignment, shell distortions, creep, fire damage and crack-like flaws. These assessment techniques can sometimes prevent costly repairs or replacement of equipment while still allowing safe operation.

A fitness-for-service assessment depends in large part on how well the defects are understood or how well the uncer-tainty of the information is characterized. It requires a solid

understanding of fracture mechanics and crack growth phenomena. Fitness-for-service uses partial safety factors, which are factors applied to the stress, crack size and material toughness to account for uncertainty in the input parameters used for the assessment and to ensure a minimal probability of failure. Also, probabilistic analysis can be used. For this, SwRI engineers use NESSUS, a 2005 R&D 100 award-winning technology developed for NASA by SwRI.

SwRI develops and uses nonde-structive evaluation techniques to char-acterize flaws in metallic structures. Expertise in these areas, coupled with experience in design, analysis, fabrica-tion and use of various pressure ves-sels (both manned and unmanned),

enables SwRI to work efficiently and effectively to assess fitness-for-service for industry and govern-ment, ensuring safe, useful life of a wide range of equipment.

Questions about this article? Contact Crouch at (210) 522-4295 or [email protected] or Sifford at (210) 522-3475 or [email protected].

Finite element analysis was used to determine the stresses in the decompression chamber.

Data from the analyses plotted on the failure assessment dia-gram show the values at which weld defects are acceptable.

D01

8883

D018877

D018878


By Roland Benke, Ph.D.

Hand-held radiation survey instruments provide impor-tant, real-time information about radiation fields and

nearby radioactive materials. Detection instruments can be sim-ple or complex, depending on the specific application and data requirements. Simple survey meters, which respond to ionizing radiation without distinguishing the radiation type or its energy, are common. Gamma-ray spectrometers yield a spectrum of count rates over numerous channels that correspond to specific gamma-ray energies, or photon wavelengths. Their spectroscopic capability allows for differentiation of characteristic emissions, which is critical to identifying and quantifying contributions from multiple radioactive materials.

The Advanced Radiation Method for Surveys (ARMS), an emerging technology developed under internal research funding at Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), adds a third level of capa-bility by generating radiation source images from existing hand-held detection instruments, without need for shielding or col-limation. ARMS data requirements are minimal: only instrument position and detector output are needed. The resulting images provide a visual indication of the energy-dependent angular

flux, or direction, of gamma rays, a quantity that is rarely measured for a solid angle of 4p steradians. (A steradian

is the three-dimensional angle created by the sides of a cone whose apex is at the center of a sphere and whose

curved base covers a certain area on the sphere’s surface.)

Laboratory demonstration

Using a commercially available gamma-ray spectrometer in a laboratory demonstration, SwRI engineers positioned natu-rally occurring radioactive material and low-intensity radioactive sources at different locations in a room to create a crisscross-ing field of gamma rays with low, medium and high energies. Because radiation measurements are more challenging with weak sources in the presence of natural background, the experi-ments were intentionally performed at background levels to test the robustness of the approach. In fact, at the central location where the survey measurement was performed, the dose rate attributed to all added sources of radiation was less than the background dose rate. Potassium chloride (salt), available from hardware stores, is a naturally occurring source of radioactive material due to the presence of the radioactive isotope 40K at about one-hundredth of 1 percent in natural potassium.

An SwRI-developed technique enhances the capability of portable gamma ray imaging devices

Within ARMS Reach

Photo courtesy of Air Photo Services Co. Ltd., Japan.


Several bags of potassium chlo-ride were grouped together in the laboratory to create weak volume sources of high-energy gamma rays. Given that the same radionuclide,

40K, also provides a significant com-ponent of the natural gamma-ray background, there was a potential

for natural background interference, not only at the high-energy photopeak, but also throughout the remainder of the lower energy portions of the spectrum. The ARMS approach overcame these challenges easily. Based on a set of measure-ments acquired at arm’s length from one central location in the room, ARMS produced a suite of three-dimensional images over the gamma-ray energy spectrum.

Although determining the three-dimensional angular flux was highlighted as an essential inter-mediate step, SwRI researchers initially had not foreseen or sought to generate images of the radia-tion source from those data. Had they not embarked on research toward the end-point, they would not have discovered something potentially more important along the way.

Other gamma-ray imaging approaches rely on detection arrays (multiple discrete detec-tor modules or position-sensitive

detectors and signal processing) and/or collimation (a process that uses shielding material to block, or significantly attenuate, incom-ing radiation except for that within a proscribed field of view). Because collimation and coded apertures reduce the instrument’s detection efficiency and add significant weight, longer measure-ment times are required and portability is limited, especially for hand-held systems. ARMS is an attractive option because it does not require gamma-ray shielding or specialized detectors.

Additional potential benefit

In the mid-1990s, the International Commission on Radiologi-cal Protection and the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements adopted updated human models for converting ionizing radiation to radiological dose. These external dose conversion coefficients are based on radiation type, radia-tion energy and direction of the incoming radiation relative to the forward-facing direction of the individual. Radiological dose is determined by accounting for the dose (the energy absorbed per unit mass) received by individual organs within the body. Certain organs are more radiosensitive than others, so organ weighting factors are applied to determine the effective dose for the whole body. Because deleterious health effects can vary for the same absorbed dose from different kinds of ionizing radiation, radiation weighting factors are applied to represent the whole-body dose that is equivalent to the radiological risk of health effects from exposure. Organs more sensitive to radiation can be shielded by

less sensitive organs and tis-sues. An inherent aspect of updated external dosimetric modeling, this intrabody shielding effect is respon-sible for the published sensitivity of external dose conversion coefficients to the incoming direction of radiation.

Dr. Roland Benke is a principal engineer and certified health physicist at the Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses in SwRI’s Geosciences and Engineering Division. He has more than 15 years of experience in radiological dose assessment, radiation detection and measurement, radiation transport modeling and risk analysis.

ARMS determines energy-dependent angular flux of gamma rays, which indicates their direction of origin. Red shading corresponds to the maximum fractional responses and incident directions. Black shading corresponds to negligible contributions.

A Japanese unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) was able to take detailed photos of damage to the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant on March 20, 2011 (from left: partial view of Unit 1 and view of Unit 2, Unit 3 and Unit 4). Similarly, UAVs equipped with radiation detectors rapidly assess the distribution of radioactive contamination on the ground surrounding damaged facilities. By providing finer spatial resolution compared to existing technologies, ARMS technology can generate tomographic maps of radionuclide concentrations at the surface and improve the detection of radioactive hot spots.

Photo courtesy of Air Photo Services Co. Ltd., Japan.

D018824_5359

D018878

D018886


Therefore, the ability to measure the angular flux, or direc-tionality, of gamma rays or X-rays with a portable instrument can improve survey measurements of radiological dose rates. Using ARMS, effective dose rate at a location can be reported based on the direction an individual is facing in the radiation field, which is a new provision for radiological surveys.

Advancing the state of the art

Although it advances the state of the radiation detection art, ARMS faces a number of practical barriers to widespread adoption. Many facilities and institutions rely on simpler and less expensive instruments without spectroscopic capability for routine survey measurements. Also, for many ionizing radiation fields the effective dose is not greatly sensitive to the direction from which the radiation originates. For X-rays and gamma rays at energy levels at or below 100 keV (kiloelectron volts), the effec-tive dose varies by less than a factor of three from different irradiation directions. At higher energies, the radiation is more penetrating, which produces a more homogeneous irradiation

within the body and diminishes the organ shielding effect. For neutron radiation over a broad energy range, different irradiation directions can change the effective dose by a fac-tor of three, and irradiation of the front of the body (anterior-to-posterior directed radiation) results in the highest effective doses compared to other irradiation directions.

As a long-standing practice, radiation workers custom- arily wear their personal radiation dosimeters on the front of their body, and institutions simply use the most conservative, anterior-to-posterior dose factors for all irradiation scenarios rather than accounting for different radiation directions. For situations in which such overestimates of radiological dose are acceptable, simplified approaches may continue to be the preferred option. Higher-fidelity dose rate information is enticing in situations requiring more realism in radiologi-cal dose estimation. Even though ARMS probably has a niche role in dose estimation, its abilities for improving gamma-ray imaging and radioactive material characterization hold even more promise.

Potential future applications

ARMS is a general technique, suitable to many mobile radiation detection measurements, including environmen-tal monitoring, cargo screening and in-plant measurements where radiation readings are collected from different posi-tions. Although demonstration measurements acquired with a spectrometer allowed for full implementation of the method, benefits also exist for ARMS applications using instruments that yield gross-count rate data instead of energy-dependent information. Medical applications, where source-to-detector distances are much shorter, also may be feasible. For beta particle detecting probes used in surgi-cal procedures with radiopharmaceuticals to intraopera-tively identify cancerous nodes and confirm their complete removal, improvements in spatial resolution and differentia-tion of nearby radionuclide foci can be expected with ARMS compared to current methods.

SwRI was awarded U.S. Patent No. 8,183,523, “System and Method for Acquiring Radiation Spectral Data in a Radiation Field and Determining Effective Dose Rate and Identifying Sources of Localized Radiation,” on May 22, 2012. ARMS tech-nology can be commercialized and readily applied to vari-ous existing systems for portable detection measurements, including hand-held, mobile vehicle and remotely operated unmanned systems. Other potentially promising applica-tions include homeland security and radiological protection. Recent interest has related to aerial measurement of envi-ronmental radioactive contamination released from damaged nuclear power plants.

Questions about this article? Contact Benke at (210) 522-5250 or [email protected].

The ARMS instrument is shown atop a platform in a laboratory test while exposed to low-level radiation emitted from bags of potassium chloride salt and other sources placed at several locations around the instrument.

D018885


TECHNICS Brief notes about the world of science and technology at Southwest Research Institute

SwRI sets low-cost ROS-I consortium membership entry fees

With input from the industrial robotics and automation community, Southwest Research

Institute (SwRI) has set a low-cost membership model for the ROS-Industrial Consortium (RIC). This model encourages a broad base of member-ship and gives participants more control over how development funds are used. In conjunction with the launch of the consortium, SwRI has funded a special internal research program to accelerate ROS-Industrial development and benefit the tech-nical needs of the consortium.

“As an early adapter of ROS, SwRI has been successfully leveraging it for industrial robotics applications,” explained Shaun Edwards, a senior research engineer in SwRI’s Automation and Data Systems Division. ROS (Robot Operating System)

SwRI engineers investigate “cognitive fingerprints” for bolstering computer passwords

It won’t make passwords passé, but a team led by Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) intends to use

“cognitive fingerprints” to make sure you are you, and not an imposter.

Even the strongest password can be used freely once it has been compromised by a computer hacker. However, a novel software-based authentication tool called covert-conditioned biometrics will attempt to use a unique sequence of problem-solving moves to distin-guish between a legitimate user and an identity thief. Re-search in support of the system is sponsored by the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

Covert-conditioned biometrics will incorporate principles of adaptive learning, behavior modification and game theory to capture and discriminate aspects of the cognitive fingerprint that authenticate a user’s identity.

“It will deploy covert games, mimicking ordinary human computer interactions. Authenticated users are likely to unknowingly develop strategies for playing the games, even if the games are imperceptible,” said Jenifer Wheeler, a senior instructional specialist in the Learning Sciences and Systems Department of SwRI’s Aerospace Electronics, Systems Engineering and Training Division.

SwRI has teamed with Sentier Strategic Resources LLC to combine SwRI’s experience in behavioral model-ing, educational software development and learning sci-ence with Sentier’s experience in cognitive psychology and human-subjects testing.

Contact Wheeler at (210) 522-6052 or [email protected].

New model reconciles the Moon’s Earth-like com-position with the giant impact theory of formation

The giant impact believed to have formed the Earth-Moon system has long been accepted as

canon. However, a major challenge to the theory has been that the Earth and Moon have identi-cal oxygen isotope compositions, even though earlier impact models indicated they should differ substantially. In a paper published Oct. 16 in the journal Science online, a new model by Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), motivated by accom-panying work by others on the early dynamical history of the Moon, accounts for this similarity in composition while also yielding an appropriate mass for Earth and Moon.

In the giant impact scenario, the Moon forms from debris ejected into an Earth-orbiting disk by the collision of a smaller proto-planet with the early Earth. Earlier models found that most or much of the disk material would have originated from the Mars-sized impacting body, whose com-

position likely would have differed substantially from that of Earth.The new models developed by Dr. Robin M. Canup, an associate

vice president in the SwRI Space Science and Engineering Division, and funded by the NASA Lunar Science Institute, involve much larger impactors than were previously considered. In the new simulations, both the impactor and the target are of comparable mass, with each containing about four to five times the mass of Mars. The near sym-metry of the collision causes the disk’s composition to be extremely similar to that of the final planet’s mantle over a relatively broad range of impact angles and speeds, consistent with the Earth-Moon compo-sitional similarities.

Contact Canup at (303) 546-9670 or [email protected].

is an open-source project providing a com-mon framework of libraries and tools for a wide range of applications, particularly in ser-vice and research robotics. In January, SwRI established the ROS-Industrial repository, an open-source resource providing a common industrial control platform to facilitate tech-nology transfer from research labs to industry.

“Following other successful open-source projects as models, SwRI is initiating a precompetitive commercial collaborative research consortium, exclusively focused on the needs of industrial robot users,” said Paul Evans, director of SwRI’s Manufacturing Systems Department. RIC full membership is set at $10,000, with lesser levels of member-ship available. Contact Evans at (210) 522-2994 or [email protected].

D1M018362_7493

D018803


NRC renews contract for SwRI to continue operating CNWRA

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has renewed its contract with Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) for the fifth time to operate the Center for Nuclear Waste Regu-latory Analyses (CNWRA®). The five-year contract, valued at almost $76 million, assures continuing technical assistance and research support to NRC activities related to storage, transpor-tation, possible reprocessing and ultimate geological disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive wastes through September 2017. The CNWRA has been located at and operated by SwRI since it was created in 1987.

Established as a federally funded research and develop-ment center, the CNWRA provides independent technical assessment to the NRC, the U.S. regulatory agency responsible for evaluating safety and environmental aspects of storage, transportation and disposal of radioactive wastes. In particular, NRC was charged by Congress to evaluate and, if appropriate, license a potential high-level radioactive waste repository.

“For the past 25 years, CNWRA has been a central part of the Commission’s efforts to evaluate engineering, environmen-tal and scientific factors affecting management of radioactive wastes,” said Dr. Wesley C. Patrick, vice president of SwRI’s Geo-sciences and Engineering Division, which oversees the CNWRA.

Contact Patrick at (210) 522-5158 or [email protected].

TECHNICS Brief notes about the world of science and technology at Southwest Research Institute

DARPA selects SwRI’s K-band space crosslink radio as communications system for a cluster of small, wirelessly connected spacecraft

The U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has selected Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) to provide the flight low-rate crosslink wireless communica-tions platform for the System F6 Program.

The System F6 Program, which is envisioned to culmi-nate in an on-orbit demonstration in 2015–2016, is designed to validate a new space mission concept in which a cluster of smaller, wirelessly connected spacecraft replaces the typical single spacecraft carrying numerous instruments and pay-loads. This “fractionated” architecture enhances survivability, responsiveness and adaptability compared to the traditional monolithic spacecraft. The SwRI K-band radio is a core ele-ment of the open source F6 Developers Kit (FDK), which allows any spacecraft to participate in an F6-enabled cluster.

“As a nonprofit organization, Southwest Research Insti-tute is ideally suited to support the DARPA System F6 FDK through the development of the K-band crosslink solution,” said Dr. Mark Tapley, a staff engineer in the SwRI Space Sci-ence and Engineering Division and principal investigator for the wireless system.

Contact Tapley at (210) 522-6025 or [email protected].

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter’s LAMP spectrometer detects helium in Moon’s atmosphere

Scientists using the Lyman Alpha Mapping Project (LAMP) aboard NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter have made the first spectroscopic observations of the noble gas helium in the tenuous atmosphere sur-rounding the Moon. These remote-sensing observations complement in-situ measurements taken in 1972 by the Lunar Atmosphere Composi-tion Experiment (LACE) deployed by Apollo 17.

Although LAMP was designed to map the lunar surface, the team expanded its science investigation to examine the far ultraviolet emis-sions visible in the tenuous atmosphere above the lunar surface, detect-ing helium over a campaign spanning more than 50 orbits. Because he-lium also resides in the interplanetary background, several techniques were applied to remove signal contributions from the background helium and determine the amount of helium native to the Moon. Geo-physical Research Letters published a paper on this research in 2012.

“The question now becomes, does the helium originate from inside the Moon, for example, due to radioactive decay in rocks, or from an exterior source, such as the solar wind?” said Dr. Alan Stern, LAMP principal investigator and associate vice president of the Space Science and Engineering Division at Southwest Research Institute.

The paper, “Lunar Atmospheric Helium Detections by the LAMP UV Spectrograph on the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter,” by Stern, K.D. Retherford, C.C.C. Tsang, P.D. Feldman, W. Pryor and G.R. Gladstone, was published in Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 39, doi:10.1029/2012GL051797, 2012.

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., developed and manages the LRO mission. LRO’s current Science Mis-sion is implemented for NASA’s Science Mission Directorate. NASA’s Exploration Systems Mission Directorate sponsored LRO’s initial one-year Exploration Mission, which concluded in September 2010.

Contact Stern at (303) 546-9670 or [email protected].

D018888


Publications

Technical STaff acTiviTieS

Altwegg, K., H. Balsiger, U. Calmonte, M. Hassig, L. Hofer, A. Jackel, B. Schlapp, P. Wurz, J.J. Berthelier, J. De Keyser, B. Fieth, S. Fuselier, U. Mall, H. Reme and M. Rubin. “In-situ Mass Spectrometry During the Lutetia Flyby.” Planetary and Space Science, Vol. 66, No. 1, (2012): 173–178, doi: 10.1016/j.pss.2011.08.011.

Anderson, C.E., I.S. Chocron, K. A. Dannemann and A.E. Nicholls. “Testing Boron Carbide Under Triaxial Compression.” Proceedings of the American Institute of Physics Conference, Vol. 1426, (2012): 88–91, doi.org/10.1063/1.3686228.

Aprile, E., J. Angle, F. Arneodo, L. Baudis, A. Bernstein, A. Bolozdynya, P. Brusov, L.C.C. Coelho, C.E. Dahl, L. Deviveiros, A.D. Ferella, L.M.P. Fernandes, S. Fiorucce, R.J. Gaitskell, K.L. Giboni, R.G. Gomez, et al. “Design and Performance of the XENON10 Dark Matter Experiment.” Astroparticle Physics, Vol. 34, No. 9 (2011): 679–698, doi: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2011.01.006.

Arridge, C.S., C.B. Agnor, N. Andre, K.H. Baines, L.N. Fletcher, D. Gautier, M.D. Hofstadter, G.H. Jones, L. Lamy, Y. Langevin, O. Mousis, N. Nettelmann, C.T. Russell, T. Stallard, M.S. Tiscareno, G. Tobie, A. Bacon, C. Chaloner, et al. “Uranus Pathfinder: Exploring the Origins and Evolution of Ice Giant Planets.” Experimental Astronomy, Vol. 33, No. 2-3, (2012) 753–791, doi: 10.1007/s10686-011-9251-4.

Basagaoglu, H., S. Melchionna, S. Succi and V. Yakhot. “Fluctuation-dissipation Relations From a FLB-BGK model.” Europhysics Letters, Vol. 99, No. 6, (2012): 64001, doi:10.1209/0295-5075/99/64001.

Bayless, A.J., E.L. Robinson, P.A. Mason and P. Robertson. “The Optical Orbital Light Curve of the Low-mass X-Ray Binary V1408 Aquilae (=4U 1957+115).” The Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 730, No. 1, (2011): 43, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/730/1/43.

Bebesi, Z., N. Krupp, K. Szego, M. Franz, Z. Nemeth, S.M. Krimigis, D.G. Mitchell, G. Erdos, D.T. Young and M.K. Dougherty. “Analysis of Energetic Electron Drop-outs in the Upper Atmosphere of Titan During Flybys in the Dayside Magnetosphere of Saturn.” Icarus, Vol. 218, No. 2, (2012): 1,020–1,027, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2012.01.009.

Borovikov, S.N., N. Sergey, V. Nikolai and R.W. Ebert. “Solar Rotation Effects on the Heliosheath Flow Near Solar Minima.” The Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 750, No. 1 (2012): 42, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/750/1/42.

Bouss, O., A. Guilbert-Lepoutre, J.I. Lunine, A.L. Cochran, J.H. Waite, J.M. Petit and P. Rousselot. “The Dual Origin of the Nitrogen Deficiency in Comets: Selective Volatile Trapping in the Nebula and Postaccretion Radiogenic Heating.” The Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 757, No. 2, (2012): 146, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/757/2/146.

Camann, D.E., S.T. Schultz, A.Y. Yau, L.P. Heilbrun, M.M. Zuniga, R.F. Palmer and C.S. Miller. “Acetaminophen, Pesticide and Diethylhexyl Phthalate Metabolites, Anandamide, and Fatty Acids in Deciduous Molars: Potential Biomarkers of Perinatal Exposure.” Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology (2012): Online, www.nature.com/jes/index.html, doi: 10.1038/jes.2012.71.

Canup, R.M. “Forming a Moon with an Earth-like Composition via a Giant Impact.” Science (2012): Online, www.sciencemag.org, doi:10.1126/science.1226073.

Chan, K. “In-situ SEM J-Testing and Crack-tip Micromechanics of Zircaloy-4 by Three-point Bending.” Experimental Mechanics, Vol. 52, (2012): 1,251–1,265, doi:10.1007/s11340-011-9587-8.

Chan, K., M. Enright, P. Golden, S. Naboulsi, R. Chandra and A. Pentz. “Probabilistic High-cycle Fretting Fatigue Assessment of Gas Turbine Engine Materials.” Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, Vol. 134, No. 6, (2012): 062502:1-8.

Chan, K., P. Enright, J. Moody, B. Hocking and S. Fitch. “Life Prediction for Turbopropulsion Systems Under Dwell Fatigue Conditions.” Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, Vol. 134, (2012): 122501.

Chan, K., M. Koike, R. Mason and T. Okabe. “Fatigue Life of Titanium Alloys Fabricated by Layer Deposition Techniques for Dental Implants.” Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, (2012): Online, www.springer.com/materials/special+types/journal/11661

Chaufray, J.Y., T.K. Greathouse, G.R. Gladstone, J.H. Waite, J.P. Maillard, T. Majeed, S.W. Bougher, E. Lellouch and P. Drossart. “Spectro-imaging Observations of Jupiter’s 2µ Auroral Emission II: Thermospheric Winds.” Icarus, Vol. 211, No. 2, (2011): 1,233–1,241, doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2010.11.021.

Chocron, I.S., D.P. Nicolella, A.E. Nicholls, T.L. Bredbenner and L. Havill. “Dynamic Testing of Old and Young Baboon Cortical Bone with Numerical Validation.” Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on the Mechanical and Physical Behavior of Materials Under Dynamic Loading, EPJ Web of Conferences, Vol. 26, No. 03004 (2012): doi:10.1051/epjconf/20122603004.

Coates, A.J., S.M.E. Tsang, A. Wellbrock, R.A. Frahm, J.D. Winningham, S. Barabash, R. Lundin, D.T. Young and F.J. Crary. “Ionospheric Photoelectrons: Comparing Venus, Earth, Mars and Titan.” Planetary and Space Science, Vol. 59, No. 10, (2011): 1,019-1,027, doi: 10.1016/j.pss.2010.07.016.

Coates, A.J., A. Wellbrock, G.R. Lewis, C.S. Arridge, F.J. Crary, D.T. Young, M.F. Thomsen, D.B. Reisenfeld, E.C. Sittler, Jr., R.E. Johnson, K. Szego, Z. Bebesi and G.H. Jones. “Cassini in Titan’s Tail: CAPS Observations of Plasma Escape.” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 117, No. A05324 (2012): 11, doi:10.1029/2012JA017595.

Davis, M.W., T.K. Greathouse, K.D. Retherford, G.S. Winters, Y. Bai and J.W. Beletic. “Far Ultraviolet Sensitivity of Silicon CMOS Sensors.” High Energy, Optical, and Infrared Detectors for Astronomy V, Proceedings of SPIE, Vol. 8453, (2012): 845308-1– 845308-12, doi:10.1117/12.926677.

DeJong, A.D., J.L. Burch, J. Goldstein, A.J. Coates and F. Crary. “Day-night Asymmetries of Low-energy Electrons in Saturn’s Inner Magnetosphere.” Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 38, No. L08106, (2011): 4, doi:10.1029/2011GL047308.

Dieval, C., E. Kallio, S. Barabash, G. Stenberg, H. Nilsson, Y. Futaana, M. Holmstrom, A. Fedorov, R.A. Frahm, R. Jarvinen and D.A. Brain. “A Case Study of Proton Precipitation at Mars: Mars Express Observations and Hybrid Simulations.” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 117, No. A06222 (2012): 11, doi:10.1029/2012JA017537.

Dinwiddie, C.L., K.K. Bradbury, R.N. McGinnis, D.E. Stillman and D.A. Ferrill. “Hydrogeologic Heterogeneity of Faulted and Fractured Glass Mountain Bedded Tuffaceous Sediments and Ash-fall Deposits: The Crucifix Site Near Bishop, California.” Lithosphere, Vol. 4, No. 1, (2012): 40–62, doi:10.1130/L179.1.

Dong, Y., T.W. Hill, B.D. Teolis, B.A. Magee and J.H. Waite. “The Water Vapor Plumes of Enceladus.” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 116, No. A10204 (2011): 13, doi:10.1029/2011JA016693.


Technical STaff acTiviTieSDurech, J., D. Vokrouhlicky, A.R. Baransky, S. Breiter, O.A. Burkhonov, W. Cooney, V. Fuller, N.M. Gaftonyuk, J. Gross, R.Y. Inasaridze, M. Kaasalainen, Y.N. Krugly, O.I. Kvaratshelia, E.A. Litvinenko, B. Macomber, F. Marchis, I.E. Molotov, J. Oey, D. Polishook, J. Pollock, P. Pravec, K. Sarneczky, V.G. Shevchenko, I. Slyusarev, R. Stephens, G. Szabo, D. Terrell, F. Vachier, Z. Vanderplate, M. Viikinkoski and B.D. Warner. “Analysis of the Rotation Period of Asteroids (1865) Cerberus, (2100) Ra-Shalom, and (3103) Eger — Search for the YORP Effect.” Astronomy and Astrophysics, Vol. 547, (2012): A10.

Ebert, R.W., M.I. Desai, M. Al-Dayeh and G.M. Mason. “Helium Ion Anisotropies in Corotating Interaction Regions at 1 AU.” The Astrophysical Journal Letters, Vol. 754, No. 2, (2012): L30, doi: 10.1088/2041-8205/754/2/L30.

Elliott, H.A., C.J. Henney, D.J. McComas, C.W. Smith and B.J. Vasquez. “Temporal And Radial Variation of the Solar Wind Temperature-Speed Relationship.” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 117, No. A09102, (2012): 16, doi:10.1029/2011JA017125.

Encrenaz, T., T.K. Greathouse, F. Lefevre and S.K. Atreya. “Hydrogen Peroxide on Mars: Observations, Interpretation and Future Plans.” Planetary and Space Science, 2012. Vol. 68, No. 1, (2012): 3–17, doi:10.1016/j.pss.2011.03.019.

Encrenaz, T., T.K. Greathouse, H. Roe, M. Richter, J. Lacy, B. Bezard, T. Fouchet and T. Widemann. “HDO and SO2 Thermal Mapping on Venus: Evidence for Strong SO2 Variability.” Astronomy and Astrophysics, Vol. 543, No. A153, (2012): 7, doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219419.

Encrenaz, T., T.K. Greathouse, M.J. Richter, J.H. Lacy, T. Fouchet, B. Bezard, F. Lefevre, F. Forget and S.K. Atreya. “A Stringent Upper Limit to SO2 in the Martian Atmosphere.” Astronomy and Astrophysics, Vol. 530, No. A37, (2011): doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201116820.

Favela, K., P. Tans, T. Jaeckle and W. Williamson. “Microcollection of Gases in a Capillary Tube: Preservation of Spatial and Temporal Resolution.” Journal of Analytical Chemistry, Vol. 84, No. 19, (2012): 8,310–8,316, doi:10.1021/ac301707w.

Feldman, P.D., D.M. Hurley, K.D. Retherford, G.R. Gladstone, S.A. Stern, W.R. Pryor, J.W. Parker, D.E. Kaufmann, M.W. Davis and M.H. Versteeg. “Temporal Variability of Lunar Exospheric Helium During January 2012 from Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter/Lyman Alpha Mapping Project.” Icarus, Vol. 221, (2012): 854–858, doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2012.09.015

Ferrill, D.A., A.P. Morris, J.A. Stamatakos, D.J. Waiting, R.A. Donelick and A.E. Blythe. “Constraints on Exhumation and Extensional Faulting in Southwestern Nevada and Eastern California, U.S.A., from Zircon and Apatite Thermochronology.” Lithosphere, Vol. 4, No: 1, (2012): 63–76, doi:10.1130/L171.1.

Ferrill, D.A., A.P. Morris and R.N. McGinnis. “Extensional Fault-propagation Folding in Mechanically Layered Rocks: The Case Against the Frictional Drag Mechanism.” Tectonophysics, Vol. 576-577, (2012): 78–85, doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2012.05.023.

Ferrill, D.A., R.N. McGinnis, A.P. Morris and K.J. Smart. “Hybrid Failure: Field Evidence and Influence on Fault Refraction.” Journal of Structural Geology, Vol. 42, (2012): 140–150, doi:10.1016/j.jsg.2012.05.012.

Francis, W., T. Eliason, B. Thacker, G. Paskoff, B. Shender and D. Nicolella. “Implementation and Validation of Probabilistic Models of the Anterior Longitudinal Ligament and Posterior Longitudinal Ligament of the Cervical Spine.” Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering, (2012): Online, www.tandfonline.com/toc/gcmb20/current

Frisch, P.C., B.-G. Andersson, A. Berdyugin, V. Piirola, B. DeMajistre, H.O. Funsten, A.M. Magalhaes, D.B. Seriacopi, D.J. McComas, N.A. Schwadron, J.D. Slavin, and S.J. Wiktorowicz. “The Interstellar Magnetic Field Close to the Sun-II.” The Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 760, No. 2, (2012): 106, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/760/2/106.

Fuselier, S.A., K.J. Trattner, S.M. Petrinec and B. Lavraud. “Dayside Magnetic Topology at the Earth’s Magnetopause for Northward IMF.” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 117, No. A08235, (2012): 14, doi:10.1029/2012JA017852.

Fuselier, S.A., F. Allegrini, M. Bzowski, H.O. Funsten, A.G. Ghielmetti, G. Gloeckler, D. Heirtzler, P. Janzen, M. Kubiak, H. Kucharek, D.J. McComas, E. Moebius, T.E. Moore, S.M. Petrinec, M. Quinn, D. Reisenfeld, L.A. Saul, J.A. Scheer, N. Schwadron, K.J. Trattner, R.Vanderspek and P. Wurz. “Heliospheric Neutral Atom Spectra Between 0.01 and 6 keV from IBEX.” The Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 754, No. 1, (2012): 14, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/754/1/14.

Fuselier, S.A. and W.S. Lewis. “Properties of Near-Earth Magnetic Reconnection from In-situ Observations.” Space Science Reviews, Vol. 160, No. 1-4, (2011): 95–121, doi:10.1007/s11214-011-9820-x.

Gonzalez, W.D. and J.L. Burch. “Key Processes in Solar-Terrestrial Physics.” Space Science Reviews, Vol. 158, No. 1, (2011): 1–3, doi: 10.1007/s11214-011-9779-7.

Greathouse, T.K., M. Richter, J. Lacy, J. Moses, G. Orton, T. Encrenaz, H.B. Hammel and D. Jaffe. “A Spatially Resolved High Spectral Resolution Study of Neptune’s Stratosphere.” Icarus, Vol. 214, No. 2, (2011): 606–621.

Griffiths, S.T., S.M. Petrinec, K.J. Trattner, S.A. Fuselier, J.L. Burch, T.D. Phan and V. Angelopoulos. “A Probability Assessment of Encountering Dayside Magnetopause Diffusion Regions.” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 116, No. A02214, (2011): 7, doi:10.1029/2010JA015316.

Grotzinger, J.P., J. Crisp, A.R. Vasavada, R.C. Anderson, C.J. Baker, R. Barry, D.F. Blake, P. Conrad, K.S. Edgett, B. Ferdowski, G.R. Bobak, J.B. Gilbert, M. Golombek, J. Gomez-Elvira, D. Hassler, L. Jandura, M. Litvak, P. Mahaffy, J. Maki, M. Meyer, M.C. Malin, I. Mitrofanov, J.C. Simmonds, D. Vaniman, R.V. Welch and R.C. Wiens. “Mars Science Laboratory Mission and Science Investigation.” Space Science Review, Vol. 170, No. 1-4, (2012): 5–56, doi:10.1007/s11214-012-9892-2.

Hansen, C.J., D.E. Shemanski, L.W. Esposito, A.I.F. Stewart, B.R. Lewis, J.E. Colwell, A.R. Hendrix, R.A. West, J.H. Waite Jr., B. Teolis and B.A. Magee. “The Composition and Structure of the Enceladus Plume.” Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 38, No. 11, (2011): 5, doi:10.1029/2011GL047415.

Hassler, D.M., C. Zeitlin, R.F. Wimmer-Schweingruber, S. Bottcher, C. Martin, J. Andrews, E. Bohm, D.E. Brinza, M.A. Bullock, S. Burmeister, B. Ehresmann, M. Epperly, D. Grinspoon, J. Kohler, O. Kortmann, K. Neal, J. Peterson, A. Posner, S. Rafkin, L. Seimetz, K.D. Smith, Y. Tyler, G. Weigle, G. Reitz and F.A. Cucinotta. “The Radiation Assessment Detector (RAD) Investigation.” Space Science Review, Vol. 170, No. 1-4, (2012): 503–558, doi: 10.1007/s11214-012-9913-1.

Henden, A.A., S.E. Levine, D. Terrell, T.C. Smith and D. Welch. “Data Release 3 of the AAVSO All-sky Photometric Survey (APASS).” Journal of the American Association of Variable Star Observers, Vol. 40, No. 1, (2012): 430.

Hendrix, A.R., T.A. Cassidy, B.J. Buratti, C. Paranicas, C.J. Hansen, B. Teolis, E. Roussos, B.E. Todd, P. Kollmann and R.E. Johnson. “Mimas’ Far-UV Albedo: Spatial Variations.” Icarus, Vol. 220, No. 2, (2012): 922–931, doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2012.06.012.


Technical STaff acTiviTieSHill, T.W., M.F. Thomsen, R.L. Tokar, A.J. Coates, G.R. Lewis, D.T. Young, F.J. Crary, R.A. Baragiola, R.E. Johnson, Y. Dong, R.J. Wilson, G.H. Jones, J.E. Wahlund, D.G. Mitchell and M. Horanyi. “Charged Nanograins in the Enceladus Plume.” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 117, No. A5, (2012): 11, doi:10.1029/2011JA017218.

Holmquist, T.J. “Modeling the Ballistic Response of the 14.5 mm BS41 Projectile.” European Physical Journal, Vol. 206, (2012): 129–137, doi:10.1140/epjst/e2012-01594-2.

Hooper, D.M., R.N. McGinnis and M. Necsoiu. “Volcaniclastic Aeolian Deposits at Sunset Crater, Arizona: Terrestrial Analogs for Martian Dune Forms.” Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, Vol. 37, No. 10, (2012): 1,090–1,105, doi:10.1002/esp.3238.

Howett, C.J.A., J.R. Spencer, T. Hurford, A. Verbiscer and M. Segura. “PacMan® Returns: An Electron-generated Thermal Anomaly on Tethys.” Icarus, Vol. 221, No. 2, (2012): 1,084–1,088, doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2012.10.013.

Hubert, B., J.C. Gerard, J. Gustin, D.V. Bisikalo, V.I. Shematovich and G.R. Gladstone. “Cassini-UVIS Observation of Dayglow FUV Emissions of Carbon in the Thermosphere of Venus.” Icarus, Vol. 220, No. 2, (2012): 635-646, doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2012.06.002.

Hurley, D.M., D.J. Lawrence, D.B.J. Bussey, R.R. Vondrak, R.C. Elphic and G.R. Gladstone. “Two-dimensional Distribution of Volatiles in the Lunar Regolith from Space Weathering Simulations.” Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 39, No. 9, (2012): 6, doi:10.1029/2012GL051105.

Ibarra, L., B. Dasgupta and K.T. Chiang. “Seismic Performance of Degraded Shear Walls for Long-term Compliance Periods.” Journal of Disaster Research, Vol. 7, No. 5, (2012): 638–644.

Jedrychowski, W., F.P. Perera, R. Whyatt, E. Mroz , E. Flak, R. Jacek, A. Penar, J. Spengler and D. Camann. “Wheezing and Lung Function Measured in Subjects Exposed to Various Levels of Fine Particles and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons.” Central European Journal of Medicine, Vol. 2, No. 1, (2012): 66–78, doi: 10.2478/s11536-006-0043-6.

Koike, M., K. Chan, S. Hummel, R. Mason and T. Okabe. “Fatigue Life of Cast Titanium Alloys Under Simulated Denture Framework Displacements.” Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, (2012): Online, http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MMTA..tmp..471C

Liang, W. and M. Enright. “Estimating the Probabilistic Size and Shape Distributions of 3D Anomalies from Sectioning Measurements Using the Stereological Unfolding Approach.” Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power, Vol. 134, No. 5, (2012): 1–7.

Livadiotis, G. and S. Elaydi. “GeneralAllee Effect in Two-species Population Biology.” Journal of Dynamical Biology, Vol. 6, No. 2, (2012): 959–973, doi: 10.1080/17513758.2012.700075.

Loh, E.D., J.D. Biel, M.W. Davis, R. Laporte, O.Y. Loh and N.J. Verhanovitz. “Spartan Infrared Camera, A High-resolution Imager for the SOAR Telescope: Design, Tests, and On-Telescope Performance.” Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, Vol. 124, No. 914, (2012): 343–370, doi: 10.1086/665597.

Mandt, K.E. , D.A. Gell, M. Perry, J.H. Waite Jr., F.A. Crary, D.T. Young, B.A. Magee, J.H. Westlake, T. Cravens, W. Kasprzak, G. Miller, J.E. Wahlund, K. Agren, N.J.T. Edberg, A.N. Heays, B.R. Lewis, S.T. Gibson, V. de la Haye and M.C. Liang. “Ion Densities and Composition of Titan’s Upper Atmosphere Derived from the Cassini Ion Neutral Mass Spectrometer: Analysis Methods and Comparison of Measured Ion Densities to Photochemical Model Simulations.” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 117, E10006, (2012): doi:10.1029/2012JE004139.

Mason, G.M., M.I. Desai and G. Li. “Solar Cycle Abundance Variations in Corotating Interaction Regions: Evidence for a Suprathermal Ion Seed Population.” The Astrophysical Journal Letters, Vol. 748, No. 2, (2012): 4, doi:10.1088/2041-8205/748/2/L31.

Mason, P.A., E.L. Robinson, A.J. Bayless and P.J. Hakala. “Long-term Optical Observations of Two LMXBS: UW CrB (=MS 1603+260) and V1408 Aql (=4U 1957+115).” The Astronomical Journal, Vol. 144, No. 4, (2012): 108, doi:10.1088/0004-6256/144/4/108.

Matsui, H., F. Darrouzet, J. Goldstein, P.A. Puhl-Quinn, Y.V. Khotyaintsev, P.A. Lindqvist, E. Georgescu, C.G. Mouikis and R.B. Torbert. “Multi-spacecraft Observations of Small-scale Fluctuations in Density and Fields in Plasmaspheric Plumes.” Annales Geophysicae, Vol. 30, No. 3, (2012) 623–637.

McComas, D.J. and N.A. Schwadron. “Disconnection from the Termination Shock: The End of the Voyager Paradox.” The Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 758, No. 1, (2012): 19, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/758/1/19.

McComas, D.J., M. Al-Dayeh, F. Allegrini, M. Bzowski, R. DeMajistre, K. Fujiki, H.O. Funsten, S. Fuselier, M. Gruntman, P.H. Janzen, M.A. Kubiak, H. Kucharek, G. Livadiotis, E. Moebius, D.B. Reisenfeld, M. Reno, N.A. Schwadron, J.M. Sokol and M. Tokumaru. “The First Three Years of IBEX Observations and Our Evolving Heliosphere.” The Astrophysical Journal Supplement, Vol. 203, No. 1, (2012): 1, doi:10.1088/0067-0049/203/1/1.

McFarland, J., A.P. Morris and D.A. Ferrill. “Stress Inversion Using Slip Tendency.” Computers and Geosciences, Vol. 41, (2012): 40-46, doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2011.08.004.

Michell, R.G., M.G. McHarg, M. Samara and D.L. Hampton. “Spectral Analysis of Flickering Aurora.” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 117, No. A3, (2012): 9, doi:10.1029/2011JA016703.

Morley, C.V., J.J. Fortney, M.S. Marley, C. Visscher, D. Saumon and S.K. Leggett. “Neglected Clouds in T and Y Dwarf Atmospheres.” Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 765, (2012): 172.

Morris, A.P., K.J. Smart, D.A. Ferrill, N.E. Reish and P.F. Cowell. “Fault Compartmentalization in Clastic Reservoirs.” American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, Vol. 96, No. 6, (2012): 1,001–1,015.

Morse, A.D., K. Altwegg, D.J. Andrews, H.U. Auster, C.M. Carr, M. Galand, F. Goesmann, S. Gulkis, S. Lee, I. Richter, S. Sheridan, S.A. Stern, M.F. A’Hearn, P. Feldman, J. Parker, K.D. Retherford, H.A. Weaver and I.P. Wright. “The Rosetta Campaign to Detect an Exosphere at Lutetia.” Planetary and Space Science, Vol. 66, No. 1, (2012) 165–172, doi:10.1016/j.pss.2012.01.003.

Necsoiu, M., N. Longépé and D. M. Hooper. “A New Methodology to Monitor Soil Moisture Over a Complex Arctic Environment, Kobuk River Valley, Alaska.” Remote Sensing Letters, Vol. 4, No. 3, (2012): 251–260.

Oates, S.R., A.J. Bayless, M.D. Stritzinger, T. Prichard, J.L. Prieto, S. Immler, P.J. Brown, A.A. Breeveld, M. De Pasquale, N.P.M. Kuin, M. Hamuy, S.T. Holland, F. Taddia and P.W.A. Roming. “Multiwavelength Observations of the Type IIb Supernova 2009mg.” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 424, No. 2, (2012): 1,297–1,306, doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2012.21311.x.

Ogasawara, K., F. Allegrini, M.I. Desai, S.A. Livi and D.J. McComas. “A Linear Mode Avalanche Photodiode for Ion Detection in the Energy Range 5-250 keV.” IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science (TNS), Vol. 59, No. 5, (2012): 2,601, doi:10.1109/TNS.2012.2210244.


Technical STaff acTiviTieSPatrick, E., K. Mandt, E. Mitchell, J. Mitchell, K. Younkin, C. Seifert and G. Williams. “A Prototype Mass Spectrometer for In-situ Analysis of Cave Atmospheres.” Review of Scientific Instruments, Vol. 83, 105116, (2012): doi:10.1063/1.4761927.

Perez, J.D., E.W. Grimes, J. Goldstein, D.J. McComas, P. Valek and N. Billor. “Evolution of CIR Storm on 22 July 2009.” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 117, No. A9, (2012): doi:10.1029/2012JA017572.

Petrinec, S.M., K.J. Trattner, S.A. Fuselier, T.D. Phan and V. Angelopoulos. “Energetic Ions Near the Dayside Magnetopause Reconnection Site: Implications for Energization Sources.” Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, Vol. 87, (2012): 65–69, doi: 10.1016/j.jastp.2011.11.011.

Pritchard, T.A., P.W.A. Roming, P.J. Brown, N.P.M. Kuin, A.J. Bayless, S.T. Holland, S. Immler, P. Milne and S.R. Oates. “Early Ultraviolet Observations of a Type IIn Supernova (2007pk).” The Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 750, No. 2, (2012): 128, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/750/2/128.

Pryor, W.R., G.M. Holsclaw, W.E. McClintock, M.A. Snow, R.J. Vervack Jr., G.R. Gladstone, S.A. Stern, K.D. Retherford and P.F. Miles. “Lyman-alpha Models for LRO LAMP from MESSENGER MASCS and SOHO SWAN Data.” Cross-Calibration of Past and Present Far UV Spectra of Solar System Objects and the Heliosphere, ISSI Sci. Rep., Vol. 12, (2012):

Randol, B.M., H.A. Elliott, J.T. Gosling, D.J. McComas and N.A. Schwadron. “Observations of Isotropic Interstellar Pick-up Ions at 11 And 17 AU From New Horizons.” The Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 755, No. 1, (2012): 75, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/755/1/75.

Reisenfeld, D.B., F. Allegrini, M. Bzowski, G.B. Crew, R. DeMajistre, P. Frisch, H.O. Funsten, S.A. Fuselier, P.H. Janzen, M.A. Kubiak, H. Kucharek, D.J. McComas, E. Roelof and N.A. Schwadron. “Variations in the Heliospheric Polar Energetic Neutral Atom Flux Observed by the Interstellar Boundary Explorer.” The Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 747, No. 2, (2012): 14, doi: 10.1088/0004-637X/747/2/110.

Rohner, U., L. Saul, P. Wurz, F. Allegrini, J. Scheer and D.J. McComas. “A Simple 3D Plasma Instrument with an Electrically Adjustable Geometric Factor for Space Research.” Measurement Science and Technology, Vol. 23, No. 2, (2012): 025901, doi:10.1088/0957-0233/23/2/025901.

Roming, P.W.A., N. Kawai and E. Pian. “The Death of Massive Stars: Supernovae and Gamma-Ray Bursts.” Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union, IAU Symposium 279, Cambridge University Press, (2012): ISBN: 9781107019799.

Salmon, J. and R.M. Canup. “Lunar Accretion from a Roche-interior Fluid Disk.” The Astrophysical Journal., Vol. 760, (2012): 83.

Schwadron, N.A., F. Allegrini, M. Bzowski, E.R. Christian, G.B. Crew, M. Al-Dayeh, R. DeMajistre, P. Frisch, H.O. Funsten, S.A. Fuselier, K. Goodrich, M. Gruntman, P. Janzen, H. Kucharek, G. Livadiotis, D.J. McComas, E. Moebius, C. Prested, D. Reisenfeld, M. Reno, E. Roslof, J. Siegel and R. Vanderspek. “Separation of the Interstellar Boundary Explorer Ribbon from Globally Distributed Energetic Neutral Atom Flux.” The Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 731, No. 1, (2011): 56, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/731/1/56.

Shi, J., M. Fama, B.D. Teolis and R.A. Baragiola. “Ion-induced Electrostatic Charging of Ice at 15-160 K.” Physical Review B., Vol. 85, No. 3, (2012): 35424, doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.85.035424.

Shinnaka, Y., H. Kawakita, H. Kobayashi, D.C. Boice and S.E. Martinez. “Ortho-to-para Abundance Ratio of Water Ion in Comet C/2001 Q4 (NEAT): Implication for Ortho-to-para Abundance Ratio of Water.” The Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 749, No. 2, (2012): 101, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/749/2/101.

Sillanpaa, I., D.T. Young, F. Crary, M. Thomsen, D. Reisenfeld, J.-E. Wahlund, C. Bertucci, E. Kallio, R. Jarninen and P. Janhunen. “Cassini Plasma Spectrometer and Hybrid Model Study on Titan’s Interaction: Effect of Oxygen Ions.” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 116, No. A7, (2011): 18, doi:10.1029/2011JA016443.

Smart, K.J., D.A. Ferrill, A.P. Morris and R.N. McGinnis. “Geomechanical Modeling of Stress and Strain Evolution in Contractional Fault-related Folding.” Tectonophysics, Vol. 576–577, (2012): 171–196, doi:10.1016/j.tecto.2012.05.024.

Steffl, A., A. Shinn, G. Gladstone, J. Parker, K. Retherford, D. Slater, M. Versteeg and S. Stern. “MeV Electrons Detected by the Alice UV Spectrograph during the New Horizons Flyby of Jupiter.” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 117, (2012): A10222, doi:10.1029/2012JA017869.

Thomsen, M.F., E. Roussos, M. Andriopoulou, P. Kollmann, C.S. Arridge, C.P. Paranicas, D.A. Gurnett, R.L. Powell, R.L. Tokar and D.T. Young. “Saturn’s Inner Magnetospheric Convection Pattern: Further Evidence.” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 117, No. A9, (2012): 19, doi:10.1029/2011JA017482.

Tokar, R.L., R.E. Johnson, M.F. Thomsen, E.C. Sittler, A.J. Coates, R.J. Wilson, F.J. Crary, D.T. Young and G.H. Jones. “Detection of Exospheric O2+ at Saturn’s Moon Dione.” Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 30, No. 3, (2012): 7, doi:10.1029/2011GL050452.

Trattner, K.J., S.M. Petrinec, S.A. Fuselier and R. Friedel. “Investigating the Relationship Between Cusp Energetic Particle Events and Cusp Diamagnetic Cavities.” Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, Vol. 87, (2012): 56–64, doi:10.1016/j.jastp.2011.08.004.

Trattner, K.J., S.M. Petrinec, S.A. Fuselier and T.D. Phan. “The Location of Reconnection at the Magnetopause: Testing the Maximum Magnetic Shear Model with THEMIS Observations.” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 117, No. A1, (2012): 12, doi:10.1029/2011JA016959.

Trattner, K.J., S.M. Petrinec, S.A. Fuselier, N. Omidi and D.G. Sibeck. “Evidence of Multiple Reconnection Lines at the Magnetopause from Cusp Observations.” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 117, No. A1, (2012): 14, doi:10.1029/2011JA017080.

Tsang, C.C.C., J.R. Spencer, E. Lellouch, M.A. Lopez-Valverde, M.J. Richter and T.K. Greathouse. “Io’s Atmosphere: Constraints on Sublimation Support from Density Variations on Seasonal Timescales Using NASA IRTF/TEXES Observations from 2001 to 2010.” Icarus, Vol. 217, No. 1, (2012): 277–296, doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2011.11.005.

Visscher, C. “Chemical Timescales in the Atmopsheres of Highly Eccentric Exoplanets.” Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 757, No. 1, (2012): 5, doi:10.1088/0004-637X/757/1/5.

Walter, G.R., M. Necsoiu and R. McGinnis. “Estimating Aquifer Channel Recharge Using Optical Remote Sensing Data Interpretation.” Ground Water, Vol. 50, No. 1, (2012): 68–76, doi:10.1111/j.1745-6584.2011.00815.x.

Walter, G.R., R. Benke and D.A. Pickett. “Effect of Biogas Generation on Radon Emissions from Landfills Receiving Radium-Bearing Waste from Shale Gas Development.” Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, Vol. 62, No. 9, September 2012, Pages 1040-1049, doi: 10.1080/10962247.2012.696084.

Wang, C., T. Nosaka, B. Yost, B. Zimmerman, E. Sutton, E. Kincaid, K. Keberle, Q. Iqbal, R. Mendez, S. Markowitz, P. Liu, T. Alford, C. Chan, K. Chan and M. O’Connell. “Printed Carbon Nanotubes on Polymer Films for Active Origami.” Materials Research Letters, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/21663831.2012.727105#preview, (2012): 1–6.



Anderson, C.E. and I.S. Chocron. “Applicability of Log-linear Stress/Strain-rate Response at Very High Strain Rates.” Paper presented at the 7th Nordmetall Colloquium, Adorf/Erzgebirge, Germany, April 2012.

Anderson, C.E. and I.S. Chocron. “Constitutive Response of S-2 Glass Composite.” Paper presented at the U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL) Ballistic Protection Technologies Workshop, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md., May 2012.

Anderson, C.E. and T.J. Holmquist. “Computational Modeling of Failure for Hypervelocity Impacts into Glass Targets.” Paper presented at the Hypervelocity Impact Symposium (HVIS 2012), Baltimore, May 2012.

Araujo, M. and B. Abbott. “PCM vs. Networking: Spectral Efficiency Wars – A Pragmatic View.” Paper presented at the International Telemetering Conference, San Diego, October 2012.

Araujo, M., T. Newton, C. Samiadji-Benthin, R. Seegmiller, M. Moodie, B. Abbott, T. Grace and W. Malatesta. “Control and Status of Telemetric Network Systems.” Paper presented at the International Telemetering Conference, San Diego, October 2012.

Arensman, W. and T. Do. “Standardized Security Objects for AMI.” Paper presented at the UCA International Users Group Summit, New Orleans, October 2012.

Avery, P. and S. Dykes. “Alternate Methods for Security in a Connected Vehicle Environment.” Paper presented at the Intelligent Transportation Society (ITS) World Congress, Vienna, Austria, October 2012.

Barth, E.L. “Ice Condensation Layers in Titan’s Stratosphere.” Paper presented at the Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting of the American Astronomical Society (AAS), Reno, Nev., October 2012.

Barth, E.L., W.M. Farrell and S.C.R. Rafkin. “Modeling Electric Fields Generated by Martian Dust Devils.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the European Planetary Science Congress, Madrid, Spain, September 2012.

Benke, R. and P. LaPlante. “Biosphere Dose Assessment: Review of Dose Consequence of Radionuclides in the Uranium-238 Series Decay Chain.” Paper presented at the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority (SSM) Workshop on the Review of SKB’s License Application for a Spent Nuclear Fuel Repository, Rånäs Castle, Sweden, May 2012.

Bertetti, F.P. and R.T. Green. “Potential Contamination from Hydraulic Fracturing in South Texas.” Paper presented at the Texas Association of Professional Geologists Conference: Truth and Facts on Hydraulic Fracturing and Environmental Implications, Houston, October 2012.

Bertetti, F.P. and R.T. Green. “Potential Contamination from Hydraulic Fracturing: What’s the Problem?” Paper presented at The University of Texas at San Antonio College of Science Research Conference 2012, San Antonio, October 2012.

Boice, D.C. “What is a Comet?” Paper presented at the 28th International Astronomical Union (IAU) General Assembly, Beijing, August 2012.

Boice, D.C. and P.H. Reiff. “Young Engineers & Scientists (YES) Engaging Teachers in Space Research.” Paper presented at the Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting of the AAS, Reno, Nev., October 2012.

Boice, D.C., H. Kawakita, H. Kobayashi, C. Naka and L. Phelps. “Modeling the Coma Chemistry of Comet C/2009 P1 (Garradd).” Paper presented at the AOGS-AGU (WPGM) Joint Assembly, Singapore, August 2012.

Boice, D.C., H. Kawakita, H. Kobayashi, C. Naka and L. Phelps. “A Chemical Model of the Coma of Comet C/2009 P1 (Garradd).” Paper presented at the Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting of the AAS, Reno, Nev., October 2012.

Boice, D.C., S.E. Martinez and W.F. Huebner. “Warning Times for Potentially Hazardous Long-period Comets.” Paper presented at the 28th International Astronomical Union (IAU) General Assembly, Beijing, August 2012.

Boyd, J. “Ethics Continued: Motivating Employees to Compliance.” Paper presented at the 22nd Annual Quality Assurance Conference, Environmental Protection Agency, Dallas, October 2012.

Boyd, J. “Data Integrity/Data Defensiblity/Ethics.” Paper presented at the Water Environment Association of Texas (WEAT) Laboratory Conference: Confidence and Capability, Austin, Texas, June 2012.

Boyd, J. “What’s Wrong with This Data? Ensuring Legal Defensibility.” Paper presented at the 22nd Annual Quality Assurance Conference, Environmental Protection Agency, Dallas, October 2012.

Bredbenner, T., R. Mason, L. Havill, E. Orwoll and D. Nicolella. “Investigating Fracture Risk Classifiers Based on Statistical Shape and Density Modeling and the MrOS Data Set.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Orthopaedic Research Society, San Francisco, February 2012.

Breslof, M. “Government Contracts — A Contracting Officer’s Perspective vs. the Recipient.” Paper presented at 2012 Society of Research Administrators (SRA) International, Orlando, Fla., October 2012.

Breslof, M. and K. Rhodes. “Award Closeout.” Paper presented at the 2012 Society of Research Administrators (SRA) International, Orlando, Fla., October 2012.

Brient, R.D. and T.R. Trbovich. “Review of SKB’s Code Documentation and QA for the SR-site Safety Assessment.” Paper presented at the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority (SSM) Workshop, Rånäs Castle, Sweden, May 2012.

Brown, M., “Commercial Vehicle Infrastructure Integration (CVII) Program.” Paper presented at 2012 ITS Texas Annual Meeting, Dallas, October 2012.

Brown, T., S. Dellenback, R. Heller and R. Strain. “Deploying Connected Vehicles Using the FDOT SunGuide® Software.” Paper presented at the Transpo 2012 Conference, Fort Myers, Fla., November 2012.

Brown, T., R. Strain and R. Heller. “Smartphone Application for Road Rangers.” Paper presented at the Transpo 2012 Conference, Fort Myers, Fla., November 2012.

Presentations

West, R.A., J.M. Ajello, M.H. Stevens, D.F. Strobel, G.R. Gladstone, J.S. Evans and E.T. Bradley. “Titan Airglow During Eclipse.” Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 39, No. 8, (2012): 5, doi:10.1029/2012GL053230.

Westlake, J.H., C.P. Paranicas, T.E. Cravens, J.G. Luhmann, K.E. Mandt, H.T. Smith, D.G. Mitchell, A.M. Rymer, M.E. Perry, J.H. Waite Jr. and J.E. Wahlund. “The Observed Composition of Ions Outflowing from Titan.” Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 39, No. L19104, (2012): 6, doi:10.1029/2012GL053079.

Young, L.A. “Volatile Transport on Inhomogeneous Surfaces: I. Analytic Expressions, with Application to Pluto’s Day.” Icarus, Vol. 221, (2012): 80–88.


Technical STaff acTiviTieSExplorer (IBEX) Along the Lines-of-sight of Voyager.” Paper presented at the Asia Oceania Geosciences Society (AOGS) and American Geophysical Union (AGU) Joint Assembly 2012, Singapore, August 2012.

Edwards, S.M. and C.L. Lewis. “ROS-Industrial — Applying the Robot Operating System (ROS) to Industrial Applications.” Paper presented at the International Conference on Robotics and Automation/Robot Operating System Developer Conference (ICRA/ROSCon), St. Paul, Minn., May 2012.

Edwards, S.M. and W.C. Flannigan. “ROS-Industrial — Open Software Components for Industrial Automation.” Paper presented at the Fraunhofer Workshop — ROS Industrial, Stuttgart, Germany, October 2012.

Elliott, H.A., D.J. McComas, P. Delamere J. Richardson, C. Smith and B. Vasquez. “Solar Wind Temperature and Speed From 5 to 23 AU.” Paper presented at the 12th Solar Wind Conference, Keauhou Bay, Hawaii, June 2012.

Elliott, H.A., R.A. Frahm, J.R. Sharber, T.A. Howard, D. Odstrcil, H. Opgenoorth, D. Andrews, O. Witasse and M. Fraenz. “The Influence of Corotating Interaction Regions on Electrons in the Martian Magnetosheath and Ionosphere.” Paper presented at the 12th Solar Wind Conference, Keauhou Bay, Hawaii, June 2012.

Evans, N.D., D. Arnett, T.C. Allison and N.W. Poerner. “Practical Application of AIV Analysis Methods for Screening, Qualification and Redesign of Complex Piping Systems.” Paper presented at InterNoise 2012, New York, August 2012.

Evans, P.T. and S. Edwards. “ROS Industrial — A Disruptive Community Approach to Industrial Robotics Software.” Paper presented at the 2012 RoboBusiness Leadership Summit, Pittsburgh, October 2012.

Feldman, P.D., D.M. Hurley, K.D. Retherford, G.R. Gladstone, S.A. Stern, W.R. Pryor, J.W. Parker, D.E. Kaufmann, M.W. Davis and M.H. Versteeg. “Temporal Variability of Lunar Exospheric Helium During January 2012 from LRO/LAMP.” Paper presented at the Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting of the AAS, Reno, Nev., October 2012.

Ferren, J.L. “Hygroscopic and Gaseous Contaminants Testing.” Paper presented at the 2012 NEBS Conference: Common Requirements for Uncommon Networks, Las Vegas, October 2012.

Brun, K. and M.G. Nored. “Valve Performance and Life of Reciprocating Compressors.” Paper presented at the 41st Turbomachinery Symposium, Houston, September 2012.

Brun, K., M.G. Nored and R. Kurz. “Analysis of Solid Particle Surface Impact Behavior in Turbomachines to Assess Blade Erosion and Fouling.” Paper presented at the 41st Turbomachinery Symposium, Houston, September 2012.

Burnside, H. “USAF ASIP Initiative for the T-37 and T-38.” Paper presented at the 2012 Worldwide Review, Ogden, Utah, September 2012.

Cabell, L., A. Clark, J. McDonough, T.T. Belski and L.R. Mobley. “Micro-Nanoparticle Suspension Formulation Development for Medical Chemical Countermeasures.” Paper presented at the 18th Biennial Medical Chemical Defense Bioscience Review, Frederick, Md., May 2012.

Camann, D., A. Yau, H. Edrisi, D. Diaz, L. Hoepner, S. Schultz, M. Perzanowski and R. Whyatt. “Pilot Study of Phthalate and Organophosphate Pesticide Metabolites in Teeth and Perinatal Exposure.” Paper presented at the 2012 International Society of Exposure Science (ISES) Annual Meeting, Seattle, October 2012.

Camann, D., S. Schultz, L. Heilbrun, R. Palmer, A. Yau, M. Zuniga and C. Miller. “Acetaminophen, Pesticide and Diethylhexyl Phthalate Metabolites, Anandamide, and Fatty Acids in Deciduous Molars.” Paper presented at the 2012 International Society of Exposure Science (ISES) Annual Meeting, Seattle, October 2012.

Camann, D.E., M. Arora, A. Bradman, R. Gunier, S. Schultz and A.Y. Yau. “Measurement of Chemicals in Deciduous Teeth: Potential Biomarkers of Perinatal Exposure.” Paper presented at the 2012 International Society of Exposure Science (ISES) Annual Meeting, Seattle, October 2012.

Camann, D.E., M.H. Rood and A.Y. Yau. “Freezer Storage Stability of 77 Semivolatile Organic Chemicals in Three Solvents.” Paper presented at the 2012 International Society of Exposure Science (ISES) Annual Meeting, Seattle, October 2012.

Chan, K., M. Enright, J. Moody, B. Hocking and S. Fitch. “Life Prediction for Turbopropulsion Systems Under Dwell Fatigue Conditions.” Paper presented at the proceedings of the 57th ASME International Gas Turbine and Aeroengine Technical Congress, Copenhagen, Denmark, June 2012.

Chirathadam, T.A. and B.A. White. “Dynamic Analysis of Process Equipment Foundations.” Paper presented at the Gas Machinery Conference, Austin, Texas, October 2012.

Chocron, I.S., C.E. Anderson and S.A. Mullin. “Testing Composites at High Rates: Results, Simulations and Challenges.” Paper presented at the 2012 Aerospace Structural Impact Dynamics International Conference, National Institute for Aviation Research, Wichita, Kan., November 2012.

Chocron, I.S., J.D. Walker, U. Heisserer and H. van Der Werff. “Some Original Material and Ballistic Experiments on HB80 Dyneema.” Paper presented at DSM Headquarters, Sittard, Netherlands, August 2012.

Cook, J.C., S.A. Stern, K.D. Retherford, C.C.C. Tsang, et al. “New Upper Limits on Numerous Lunar Atmosphere Gases.” Paper presented at the Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting of the AAS, Reno, Nev., October 2012.

Crosby, K.S. “In Pursuit of Process Excellence — Don’t Let the Terminology Immobilize You!” Guest blog with Business Bank of Texas, http://www.businessbankoftexas.com, October 2012.

Dannemann, K.A., S.W. Smith, I.S. Chocron and A.E. Nicholls. “High Strain Rate Effects on Fracture of Niobium C-103.” Paper presented at the Materials Science and Technology (MS&T) 2012 Conference, Pittsburgh, October 2012.

Dante, J.F. “Implication of Atmospheric Wetness Levels on Corrosion at a Coating Defect During Accelerated Testing.” Paper presented at ASETS Defense 2012, San Diego, August 2012.

Dante, J.F. “Real-time Measure of Corrosion Under Differing Relative Humidity Conditions.” Paper presented at the Materials Science and Technology (MS&T) 2012 Conference, Pittsburgh, October 2012.

Dellenback, S., R. Garcia and J. Gassaway. “Negative Obstacle Detection Using Cooperative Systems.” Paper presented at the 2012 ITS World Congress, Vienna, Austria, October 2012.

Desai, M.I. “ Suprathermal and Pickup Ions in the Inner Heliosphere.” Paper presented at the 2nd In-Situ Heliospheric Workshop at Johns Hopkins University/Applied Physics Laboratory, Laurel, Md., September 2012.

Desai, M., F. Allegrini, M. Dayeh, R. DeMajistre, H. Funsten, N. Pogorelov, J. Heerikhuisen, G. Zank, D.J. McComas and S. Fuselier. “Spectral Properties of 0.5-6 keV Energetic Neutral Atoms Measured by the Interstellar Boundary


Technical STaff acTiviTieSFerrill, D.A., A.P. Morris and R.N. McGinnis. “Normal-fault-propagation Folding in Mechanically Layered Carbonates and Shale: The Case Against ‘Fault Drag’.” Paper presented at the American Association of Petroleum Geologists Annual Meeting, Long Beach, Calif., April 2012.

Frahm, R.A., J.R. Sharber, J.D. Winningham, H.A. Elliott, T.A. Howard, C.E. DeForest, D. Odstrcil, E. Kallio, S. McKenna-Lawler and S. Barabash. “Solar Energetic Particle Arrival at Mars Due to the 27 January 2012 Solar Storm.” Paper presented at the 12th Solar Wind Conference, Keauhou Bay, Hawaii, June 2012.

Frahm, R.A., J.R. Sharber, J.D. Winningham, H.A. Elliott, T.A. Howard, C.E. DeForest, D. Odstrcil, E. Kallio, S. McKenna-Lawler and S. Barabash. “The Coronal Mass Ejection Interaction with the Induced Magnetosphere of Mars Due to the 27 January 2012 Solar Storm.” Paper presented at the 12th Solar Wind Conference, Keauhou Bay, Hawaii, June 2012.

Francis, W., D. Nicolella, J. McFarland, P. Whitley and B. Shender. “Development and Implementation of a Fast Running Injury Prediction Tool for the Cervical Spine.” Paper presented at the 83rd Annual Scientific Meeting of the Aerospace Medical Association, Atlanta, May 2012.

Freitas, C.J. ”WPS — A Wellbore Performance Simulator.” Paper presented at the Baker Hughes Modeling and Simulations Technology Symposium, Houston, October 2012.

Freitas, C.J., J.T. Mathis, N.L. Scott and R.P. Bigger. “Dynamic Measurement of Behind Helmet Blunt Trauma with a Human Head Surrogate.” Paper presented at the PASS 2012 Personal Armour Systems Symposium, Nuremberg-Furth, Germany, September 2012.

Freitas, C.J., R.P. Bigger, N.L. Scott and V. LaSala. “Composite Materials Dynamic Back Face Deflection Characteristics.” Paper presented at the PASS 2012 Personal Armour Systems Symposium, Nuremberg-Furth, Germany, September 2012.

Garcia-Hernandez, A. and S.P. Siebenaler. “Acoustic Leak Detection Technology Assessment.” Paper presented at the 2012 ASME International Pipeline Conference, Calgary, Canada, September 2012.

Gatewood, J.T., J.J. Moore, M.G. Nored, K. Brun and V. Iyengar. “The Texas Cryogenic Oxy-Fuel Cycle (TCO): A Novel Approach to Power Generation with CO2 Options.” Paper presented at the 2012 ASME Turbo Expo, Copenhagen, June 2012.

Goguen, J.D.., B.J. Buratti, R.H. Brown, R.N. Clark, P.D. Nicholson, M.M. Hedman, C. Sotin, D.P. Cruikshank, K.H. Baines, K.J. Lawrence, J.R. Spencer and D. Blackburn. “Cassini VIMS Observations of Thermal Emission from The Warmest ‘Tiger Stripes’ Near the South Pole on Enceladus.” Paper presented at the Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting of the AAS, Reno, Nev., October 2012.

Green, R.T. “Water Considerations in Hydraulic Fracturing.” Paper presented at the Texas Alliance of Groundwater Districts Texas Groundwater Summit, Austin, Texas, August 2012.

Grosch, D.J. “Armored Vehicle Fuel Tank Study.” Paper presented at the 63rd Meeting of the Aeroballistics Range Association, Brussels, Belgium, October 2012.

Grotzinger, J., D. Blake, J. Crisp, K. Edgett, R. Gellert, J. Gomez-Elvira, D. Hassler, P. Mahaffy, M. Malin, M. Meyer, I. Mitrofanov, A. Vasavada and R. Wiens. “Mars Science Laboratory: Mission, Landing Site and Initial Results.” Paper presented at the Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting of the AAS, Reno, Nev., October 2012.

Howett, C., J. Spencer, T. Hurford and A. Verbiscer. “Cassini/CIRS View of Dione and Rhea: The Search for Activity and Ring Infall.” Paper presented at the Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting of the AAS, Reno, Nev., October 2012.

Jessup, K.L. and J. Spencer. “Spatially Resolved Observations of Io’s Dayside Equatorial Atmosphere.” Paper presented at the Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting of the AAS, Reno, Nev., October 2012.

Johnson, G.R., S.R. Beissel and C.A. Gerlach. “A Combined Particle-element Method for High-velocity Impact Computations.” Paper presented at the 12th Hypervelocity Impact Symposium, Baltimore, September 2012.

Jung, K.H., S. Lovinsky-Desir, B. Liu, C. Folch, M. Perzanowski, B. Yan, S. Chillrud, R. Whyatt, D. Camann, P. Kinney, F. Perera and R. Miller. “Characterization of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Levels in Repeat Indoor Air and Urine Samples in a Prospective Birth Cohort Study.” Paper presented at the 2012 International Society of Exposure Science (ISES) Annual Meeting, Seattle, October 2012.

Kavelaars, J.J., J.R. Spencer, S.D. Benecchi, R.P. Binzel, D. Borncamp, M.W. Buie, F.E. DeMeo, S. Fabbro, C.I. Fuentes, P.L. Gay, S.D.J. Gwyn, M.J. Holman, B.A. McLeod, D.J. Osip, A.H. Parker, S.S. Sheppard, S.A. Stern, D.J. Tholen, D.E.

Trilling, D.A. Ragozzine and L.H. Wasserman. “Searching for Kuiper Belt Object Flyby Targets for the New Horizons Spacecraft.” Paper presented at the Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting of the AAS, Reno, Nev., October 2012.

Killough, R. “Security for Cyber-physical Systems: It’s Not Your Father’s Cybersecurity.” Paper presented at the National Science Foundation-Scholarship for Service (NSF-SFS) Workshop on Educational Initiatives in Cybersecurity for Critical Infrastructure, Lubbock, Texas, November 2012.

Kurz, R., C. Meher-Homji, K. Brun and J.J. Moore. “Gas Turbine Performance and Maintenance.” Paper presented at the 41st Turbomachinery Symposium, Houston, September 2012.

Lamb, D., C. DeForest, A. Davey and R. Timmons. “SWAMIS Magnetic Feature Tracking for SDO.” Paper presented at the AAS/SPD Meeting, Anchorage, Alaska, June 2012.

Lamb, D., C. DeForest, R. Timmons and A. Davey. “SWAMIS Emerging Flux Detection and Magnetic Feature Tracking for SDO.” Paper presented at the Solar Image Processing Workshop, Bozeman, Mont., August 2012.

Least, B., S. Greci, R.C. Burkey, A. Ufford and A. Wileman. “Autonomous ICD Single Phase Testing.” Paper presented at the 2012 Society of Petroleum Engineers Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, October 2012.

Libardoni, M. and J.H. Waite. “The Role of Mass Spectrometry in Solar System Geochemistry and Planetary Atmospheres — Past Missions to State-of-the-Art Instrument Development.” Paper presented at the Tecan Group Symposium on Mass Spectrometry and Its Role in Life Sciences, Boston, October 2012.

Libardoni, M., G. Miller and J.H. Waite. “Mass Spectrometry for Space Science Applications — The Search for Organics.” Paper presented at the University of Rostock Seminar Series on Mass Spectrometry, Hamburg, Germany, November 2012.

Libardoni, M., T. Brockwell, G. Miller, K. Pickens, R. Blase, J.H. Waite and D.T. Young. “Comprehensive Two-dimensional Gas Chromatography and Time-of-flight Mass Spectrometry (GC×GC-TOFMS) for In-Situ Analysis of Organic Material in Harsh Environments.” Paper presented at the International Workshop on Instrumentation for Planetary Missions, Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md., October 2012.


Technical STaff acTiviTieSPensado, O. and S. Mohanty. “Independent Radionuclide Transport Modeling — Reproducing Results for Main Scenarios.” Paper presented at the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority (SSM) Workshop on the Review of SKB’s License Application for a Spent Nuclear Fuel Repository, Rånäs Castle, Sweden, May 2012.

Peralta, J., D. Luz, D.L. Berry, C.C.C. Tsang, A. Migliorini, G. Piccioni and P. Drossart. “Nature of Atmospheric Waves at the Cloud Tops of the Polar Region of Venus (Renamed: Characterization of Atmospheric Waves at the Upper Clouds in the Polar Region of Venus).” Paper presented at the 2012 European Planetary Science Congress, Madrid, Spain, September 2012.

Persyn, J. “Micro/Nano Encapsulation Technology Overview and Applications.” Paper presented at the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE) 48th Annual Meeting, San Antonio, October 2012.

Persyn, J., D. Barlow, M. Jenkins and R. Fetterer. “Practical Applications of Gel-bead Technology for Administering Eimeria Oocysts to Day Old Chicks.” Paper presented at the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Annual Convention, San Diego, August 2012.

Putzig, N.E., L.M. Bowers, M.T. Mellon, K.E. Herkenhoff and R. Phillips. “Thermal Effects of Physical Heterogeneity in Olympia Undae.” Paper presented at the Third International Planetary Dunes Workshop: Remote Sensing and Image Analysis of Planetary Dunes. Flagstaff, Ariz., June 2012.

Quiroz, C. “OPNET Modeling of Plug and Play Spacecraft Networks.” Paper presented at the Flight Software Workshop, San Antonio, November 2012.

Rathbun, J.A., R. Lopes and J.R. Spencer. “Active Volcanoes During the New Horizons Era: Insights from LORRI and MVIC.” Paper presented at the Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting of the AAS, Reno, Nev., October 2012.

Retherford, K.D., A.R. Hendrix, G.R. Gladstone, S.A. Stern, P.F. Miles, A.F. Egan, D.E. Kaufmann, P.D. Feldman, D.M. Hurley, T.K. Greathouse, J.W. Parker, A.J. Bayless, M.W. Davis, J.C. Cook and J. Mukherjee. “Lunar Far-UV Albedo Maps: LRO/LAMP Investigations of Dayside Surface Hydration and Space Weathering.” Paper presented at the Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting of the AAS, Reno, Nev., October 2012.

Livadiotis, G. and D.J. McComas. “Near-equilibrium Heliosphere — Far-equilibrium Heliosheath: Possible Mechanisms?” Paper presented at the 13th International Solar Wind Conference, Keauhou Bay, Hawaii, June 2012.

McClung, R., M. Enright, W. Liang, J. Moody, W. Wu, R. Shankar, W. Luo, J. Oh and S. Fitch. “Integration of Manufacturing Process Simulation with Probabilistic Damage Tolerance Analysis of Aircraft Engine Components.” Paper presented at the 14th AIAA Non-Deterministic Approaches Conference, Honolulu, April 2012.

McClung, R., Y. Lee, M. Enright and W. Liang. “New Methods for Automated Fatigue Crack Growth and Reliability Analysis.” Paper presented at the 57th ASME International Gas Turbine and Aeroengine Technical Congress, Copenhagen, June 2012.

McComas, D.J. “TWINS and IBEX ENA Imaging of the Magnetosphere, Storms and Substorms.” Paper presented at the Cluster THEMIS Workshop, Boulder, Colo., October 2012.

McGinnis, R.N., A.P. Morris, D.A. Ferrill and K.J. Smart. “Analysis of Subseismic Faults and Extension Fractures in a Laramide-age Anticline in Cretaceous Carbonates at Persimmon Gap, Big Bend National Park.” Paper presented at the American Association of Petroleum Geologists Annual Meeting, Long Beach, Calif., April 2012.

McMurry, J. and F.P. Bertetti. “Review of Groundwater Chemistry in SKB’s Safety Assessment SR-Site.” Paper presented at the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority (SSM) Workshop on the Review of SKB’s License Application for a Spent Nuclear Fuel Repository, Rånäs Castle, Sweden, May 2012.

Miller, S. “ ‘Better?’ Bulk Transfer Alternatives to CFDP.” Paper presented at the Flight Software Workshop, San Antonio, November 2012.

Mitchem, S. and G Trevino. “Cyber Security of Grid-connected Systems.” Paper presented at the Border Energy Forum, Hermosillo, Mexico, October 2012.

Monreal, R.M. and G. Swift. “Upset Manifestations in Embedded Digital Signal Processors due to Single Event Effects.” Paper presented at the 2012 European Conference on Radiation and Its Effects on Components and Systems (RADECS), Biarritz, France, September 2012.

Mullin, S.A., D.J. Grosch, J.T. Mathis and R.P. Bigger. “Methodology and Experience Launching Birds, Ice, and Many Different Foreign Objects to High Velocity, and Monitoring Target Response.” Paper presented at the 2012 Aerospace Structural Impact Dynamics International Conference, National Institute for Aviation Research, Wichita, Kan., November 2012.

Ofoegbu, G.I. and K.J. Smart. “Shear Movement of Near-field Rock Due to Large Earthquakes.” Paper presented at the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority (SSM) Workshop on the Review of SKB’s License Application for a Spent Nuclear Fuel Repository, Rånäs Castle, Sweden, May 2012.

Oxley, J. “Materials Used in Encapsulation.” Paper presented at the 4th Industrial Workshop on Microencapsulation, Geneva, Switzerland, May 2012.

Oxley, J. “Coacervation and Chemical Processes.” Paper presented at the 5th Industrial Workshop on Microencapsulation, Minneapolis, Minn., September 2012.

Oxley, J. “Economics of Encapsulation.” Paper presented at the 5th Industrial Workshop on Microencapsulation, Minneapolis, Minn., September 2012.

Parker, A., M. Buie, D. Osip, S. Gwyn, M. Holman, D. Borncamp, J. Spencer, S. Benecchi, R. Binzel, F. DeMeo, S. Fabbro, C. Fuentes, P. Gay, J. Kavelaars, B. McLeod, J. Petit, S. Sheppard, A. Stern, D. Tholen, D. Trilling, D. Ragozzine, L. Wasserman, et al. “Discovery and Characterization of an L5 Neptune Trojan in the Search for a New Horizons Encounter Candidate.” Paper presented at the Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting of the AAS, Reno, Nev., October 2012.

Parra, J.O., X. Emery, J.S. Parra. “Integration of Crosswell Reflection Seismic with Well Logs Using Co-kriging for Mapping Conduits in Carbonate Aquifers.” Paper presented at the 2012 Society of Exploration International Conference, Las Vegas, November 2012.

Pendleton, E., R. Biggs, R. Cochran, B. Clark and K.E. Griffin. “Integrated Composite Structures Demonstration for Future Space Launch Vehicle Airframe Applications.” Paper presented at the 53rd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, Honolulu, April 2012.


Technical STaff acTiviTieSRetherford, K.D., S.A. Stern, G.R. Gladstone, J.C. Cook, A.F. Egan, P.F. Miles, J.W. Parker, D.E. Kaufmann, T.K. Greathouse, C.C.C. Tsang, M.H. Versteeg, J. Mukherjee, M.W. Davis, A.J. Bayless, P.D. Feldman, D.M. Hurley, W.R. Pryor and A.R. Hendrix. “Scientific Breakthroughs from the LRO-Lyman Alpha Mapping Project (LAMP).” Paper presented at the Lunar Exploration Assessment Group (LEAG) Meeting, Greenbelt, Md., October 2012.

Salmon, J. and R.M. Canup. “Lunar Accretion and the Moon’s Initial Thermal State.” Paper presented at the Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting of the AAS, Reno, Nev., October 2012.

Schrader, K.H. “Role of Flight Data Recording in ASIP.” Paper presented at the 2012 Worldwide Review, Ogden, Utah, September 2012.

Schultz, S. and D. Camann. “Acetaminophen and Autism Risk.” Paper presented at the 2012 International Society of Exposure Science (ISES) Annual Meeting, Seattle, October 2012.

Schwamb, M.E., J.A. Orosz, J.A. Carter, D.A. Fischer, A.W. Howard, J.R. Crepp, W.F. Welsh, N.A. Kaib, C.J. Lintott, D. Terrell, J.J. Jek, R. Gagliano, M. Parrish, A.M. Smith, S. Lynn, J.M. Brewer, M.J. Giguere, K. Schawinski and R.J. Simpson. “Planet Hunters: A Status Report.” Paper presented at the Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting of the AAS, Reno, Nev., October 2012.

Seegmiller, R., G. Willden, M. Araujo, T. Newton, B. Abbott and W. Malatesta. “Automation of Generalized Measurement Extraction from Telemetric Network Systems.” Paper presented at the International Telemetering Conference, San Diego, October 2012.

Siebenaler, S.P. “External Leak Detection.” Paper presented at the 2012 ASME International Pipeline Conference, Calgary, Canada, September 2012.

Siebenaler, S.P. and G. Walter. “Detection of Small Leaks in Liquid Pipelines Utilizing Distributed Temperature Sensing.” Paper presented at the 2012 ASME International Pipeline Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, September 2012.

Smith, C.B., Q.R. Black and M. Magee. “Computer Vision for Improved Single-sensor Spectrum Sensing.” Paper presented at the Sensor Signal Processing for Defence (SSPD) 2012, London, September 2012.

Spencer, J.R., N.J.P. Gorius, C.J.A. Howett, D.E. Jennings and S.A. Albright. “The Spatial Distribution of Thermal Emission from Baghdad Sulcus, Enceladus, at 100 meter Scales.” Paper presented at the Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting of the AAS, Reno, Nev., October 2012.

Stern, S.A., K.D. Retherford, J.C. Cook, C.C.C. Tsang, P.D. Feldman, W. Pryor and G.R. Gladstone. “Lunar Atmospheric Helium Detections by the LAMP UV Spectrograph on the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter.” Paper presented at the Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting of the AAS, Reno, Nev., October 2012.

Tavares, T.S., M.A. Wilcox and J.T. Gatewood. “Performance Assessment of Centrifugal and Reciprocating Compressor Units from Field Testing.” Paper presented at the 2012 Gas Machinery Conference, Austin, Texas, October 2012.

Trevino, G. and C. Fronda. “High-fidelity PV Data Acquisition for Forecasting Solar Power Production.” Paper presented at the 2012 National Instruments Week Conference, Austin, Texas, August 2012.

Trevino, G. and S. Mitchem. “Electric Vehicles Are Coming — Are You Ready?” Paper presented at the Border Energy Forum, Hermosillo, Mexico, October 2012.

Tsang C.C.C., J.A. Rathbun and J.R. Spencer. “New Horizons-LEISA observations of Io’s Hotspots During the 2007 Encounter.” Paper presented at the Division for Planetary Sciences Meeting of the AAS, Reno, Nev., October 2012.

Vinogradov, S., G.M. Light, H. Kwun and D.L. Wagar. “MsS® Guided Wave Probe and Coupling Approach for Reliable Long-term Structural Health Monitoring of Pipelines.” Paper presented at the ASNT Fall 2012 Conference, Orlando, Fla., October 2012.

Wickert, M., T. Behner, A. Heine, C.E. Anderson and D.W. Templeton Jr. “Ballistic Response of Brittle Materials: Review of a Successful DEU-USA Cooperation.” Paper presented at the Land Combat Lethality and Survivability Workshop, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Aberdeen, Md., May 2012.

Wilcox, M.A., R. Kurz, N.W. Poerner and K. Brun. “Development of Test Procedure for Quantifying the Effects of Salt and Water on Gas Turbine Inlet Filtration.” Paper presented at the 2012 ASME Turbo Expo, Copenhagen, June 2012.

Winters, G.S., K.D. Retherford, M.W. Davis, S.M. Escobedo, E.L. Patrick, E. Bassett, M.E. Nagengast, M.H. Fairbank, P.F. Miles, J.W. Parker, G.R. Gladstone and S.A. Stern. “The Southwest Research Institute Ultraviolet Reflectance Chamber (SwURC): A Far Ultraviolet Reflectometer.” Paper presented at the Society of Photo-optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Meeting, San Diego, August 2012.

Wood, P. “Cyber Attacks: An Emerging Threat to Satellites.” Paper presented at the Flight Software Workshop, San Antonio, November 2012.

Yau, A., J. Gomez and L. Scheller. “Determination of 4-Methylimidazole in Coffee by LC/MS/MS.” Paper presented at the 2012 Association of Analytical Communities (AOAC) Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, October 2012.

Yau, A.Y., M. Zuniga, C. Gourley, M. Rood, H. Edrisi and D.E. Camann. “Methods Development for the Analysis of Semivolatile Organic Compounds in Deciduous Teeth.” Paper presented at the 2012 International Society of Exposure Science (ISES) Annual Meeting, Seattle, October 2012.


Patents


Internal ResearchBenke, R. “System and Method for Acquiring Radiation Spectral Data in a Radiation Field and Determining Effec-tive Dose Rate and Identifying Sources of Localized Radiation.” U.S. Patent No. 8,183,523. May 2012.

Chan, K., N. Cheruvu and W. Liang. “Cor-rosion Resistant Coatings Suitable for Elevated Temperature Application.” U.S. Patent No. 8,230,797. July 2012.

Chocron, I., A. Nicholls, C. Anderson Jr. and J. Walker. “Techniques to Measure Strain Development and Failure in a Fabric.” U.S. Patent No. 8,240,200. August 2012.

Gordon, C., C. Harbold and H. Hanson. “Method of Insertion of an Expandable Intervertebral Implant.” U.S. Patent No. 8,257,440. September 2012.

Moore, J., T. Allison and A. Lerche. “Squeeze Film Damper Valve for Com-pressor Cylinders.” U.S. Patent No. 8,240,330. August 2012.

Sasaki, S. and J. Sarlashkar. “Hybrid Sys-tem for Motor Vehicle with Internal Com-bustion Engine and Motor-generator.” U.S. Patent No. 8,214,094. July 2012.

Siemsen, P. and R. King. “Portable Pop-up Direction Finding Antenna.” U.S. Patent No. 8,253,638. August 2012.

Wei, R. and E. Langa. “Method and Appa-ratus for High Rate, Uniform Plasma Pro-cessing of Three-dimensional Objects.” U.S. Patent No. 8,252,388. August 2012.

Funded October 1, 2012

Allegrini, F., K. Coulter and M.A. Dayeh. “Carbon Foil Properties for Space Plasma Instrumentation: Carbex-2.”

Anderson, S. “Capability Demonstration of Laser Desorption Resonance Ionization Mass Spectrometry for Domestic Nuclear Detection Office and NASA.”

Bauta, W. “HI-6 Process Development and Parametric Studies.”

Bayless, A. and P. Roming. “Capability Development of Type II Supernova Models.”

Chadwell, C. “D-EGR Engine and Vehicle Demonstration Project.”

Cobb, A. “Development of the MsSR4040SF Magnetostrictive Sensor Technology—Electronics Hardware.”

Darnell, M. and W. Toczynski. “Feasibility of an Inter-satellite Transceiver for Small Spacecraft.”

Edwards, S. “ROS-Industrial Strategic Technology Development.”

Furman, B. “Photoresponsive Polymeric Composites Utilizing UV Light Harvesting from Upconverting Nanoplatelets.”

Holladay, K. “Unsupervised Learning Using Minimizing Minimum Message Length Fitness.”

Miles, P., S. Livi, E. Patrick and K. Ogasawara. “Capability Development for Impact Ionization Cross-section of Molecules.”

Moore, A. “Non-homogeneous, Non-static Aggregate Test Bed.”

Music, W. “Semi-Blind Multi-user Detector Based on LTE Uplink Control Channel Structure.”

Owston, R., S. Svedeman, S. Green, S. Siebenaler and R. Wei. “Development and Demonstration of Erosion Prediction Capabilities for Oil and Gas Industry Applications.”

Oxley, J. “Novel Emulsion-based Encapsulation Process.”

Perry, W. “Tactical Aerobotic Launch System (TALS) Evaluation and Demonstration.”

Polendo, J. and B. Nance. “Parallel Channel Direction Finding and Beamforming from Airborne Platforms Structure.”

Wall, C., P. Lee, T. Reinhart and M. Treuhaft. “Detecting Piston Ring Instability with Engine Vibration Analysis.”

Wellinghoff, S. and V. Lee. “LocalApplication, Controlled Release Formulation Strategy for the Amelioration of Oral Mucositis.”

Wyrick, D. and K. Smart. “Workflow Development: Oil Industry 3D Surfaces and Geometries to 3D CAD Formats to 3D Solid Models.”


Southwest Research Institute is an indepen-dent, nonprofit, applied research and develop-ment organization. The staff of more than 3,000 employees pursue activities in the areas of communication systems, modeling and simula-tion, software development, electronic design, vehicle and engine systems, automotive fuels and lubricants, avionics, geosciences, polymer and materials engineering, mechanical design, chemical analyses, environmental sciences, space sciences, training systems, industrial engineering and more.

SwRI is always looking for talented techni-cal staff for its San Antonio facilities and for locations elsewhere in the United States. We welcome your referrals. The Institute is an Equal Opportunity Employer, M/F/D/V, committed to diversity in the workplace. Check our employ-ment opportunities at jobs.swri.org.

Trade Shows

Look for Southwest Research Institute at the following:

coming up

employment

RecenT feaTUReS

Fax requests for articles previously published in Technology Today to (210) 522-3547 or e-mail [email protected]. Recent Technology Today features, as well as a listing of older titles, are available online at technologytoday.swri.org. To receive an online subscription, visit update.swri.org.

Recent Features from Technology Today

A Cosmic Energy Source in 3-D (Summer 2012)David T. Young, Ph.D.SwRI-developed Hot Plasma Composition Analyzers will fly aboard four satellites studying magnetic reconnection as part of NASA’s Magnetospheric Multiscale mission.

Shared Research (Summer 2012)SwRI’s extensive consortia experience stems from a 1984 law.

A Cast of Thousandths (Summer 2012)An SwRI-developed method of casting diesel engine cylinder heads with greater precision wins an R&D 100 Award.

Unmanned and Downrange (Summer 2012)Ryan D. LammSwRI engineers successfully demonstrated military applications for autonomous unmanned ground vehicles during 2012.

Clues from Burning Furniture (Spring 2012)Marc L. Janssens, Ph.D., FSFPEAn SwRI-led study of how upholstered furniture burns will help fire investigators reduce uncertainty in determining the cause of a fire.

Searching the Moon’s Shadows (Spring 2012)Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter’s LAMP reveals craters’ hidden features.

Secrets Written in Dust (Spring 2012)Kristin Favela, Ph.D.Research chemists at SwRI investigated dust for its ability to retain unique source attribution profiles.

Aiming for the Stars (Spring 2012)Eliot F. Young, Sc.D.An SwRI-led team examined the potential for a balloon-borne telescope to acquire and track celestial targets.

Seeing Sea Ice (Winter 2011)Michael Lewis, Ph.D., and Marius Necsoiu, Ph.D.SwRI scientists analyze satellite radar data to gain insight into annual changes in the volume of sea ice near Antarctica.

Controlling Greenhouse Gases (Winter 2011)J. Jeffrey Moore, Ph.D., Andrew Lerche, Hector Delgado and Tim Allison, Ph.D.SwRI researchers develop advanced centrifugal compressor technology for carbon capture and sequestration.

• SPIE Photonics West, San Francisco; February 2-7, 2013

• AABC (Advanced Automotive Batteries Conference), Pasadena, Calif.; February 4-8, 2013

• Gas/Electric Partnership Conference, Houston; February 6-7, 2013

• Cyber Security Implementation Workshop, Savannah, Ga.; February 19-20, 2013

• International Filtration Conference, San Antonio; March 5-7, 2013

• TMC Annual Meeting and Transportation Technology Exhibition, Nashville, Tenn.; March 11-14, 2013

• Middle East Turbomachinery Symposium, Qatar; March 17-21, 2013

• NACE Corrosion Conference and Expo, Orlando, Fla.; March 17-21, 2013

• Dixie Crow, Warner Robins, Ga.; March 24-28, 2013

• Aircraft Airworthiness and Sustainment Conference, Grapevine, Texas; March 25-28, 2013

• 29th National Space Symposium, Colorado Springs, Colo.; April 8-11, 2013

• Advanced Biofuels Leadership Conference, Washington; April 14-19, 2013

• ITS America Annual Meeting and Expo, Nashville, Tenn.; April 22-24, 2013

• AIChE Spring Meeting, San Antonio; April 28-May 2, 2013

• Offshore Technology Conference, Houston; May 6-9, 2013

• AAPG 2013 Annual Convention & Exhibition, Pittsburgh; May 19-22, 2013

• Space Tech Expo, Long Beach, Calif.; May 21-23, 2013

• ASME Turbo Expo, San Antonio; June 3-7, 2013

Technology TodaySouthwest Research Institute6220 Culebra RoadP.O. Drawer 28510San Antonio, Texas 78228-0510United States

Nonprofit Org.U.S. POSTAGEPAIDPermit No. 234San Antonio, Texas

Benefiting government, industry and the public through innovative science and technology

Southwest Research Institutewww.swri.org

®�

Find Us On

fit for service - southwest research institute

Documents